Lizzie Borden Society Forum

The November 2008 issue of The Hatchet: Lizzie Borden's Journal of Murder, Mystery & Victorian History has been placed ONLINE for your reading pleasure. 88 pages in length!

As you can see, we have once again discovered a new Borden image—this time our beloved Emma Borden! Read all about the details in the new issue!

The November issue is chocked full of excellent articles—new author Jerry Ross takes us along on his visit to Anaconda, Montana, to find Bridget Sullivan; Richard Behrens writes about the murder of Helen Jewett; Denise Noe investigates the life of Elizabeth Montgomery; David Marshall James offers up a stunning piece of fiction; Sherry Chapman explains what was in Abby's Pocket; Michael Brimbau gives us an important look into Fall River's non-existent historical vision; Poems offered by A.L. Bixby, Aurora Lewis, and Michael Brimbau; Douglas Walters graces the pages with another installment of the Compositor's Bench; Eugene Hosey shares his critical eye about Todd Lunday's book The Mystery Unveiled; and we meet author Glen "Joe" Carlson! Whew!

Subscribers can download your copy immediately or view a slideshow of the magazine at this address:

http://www.hatchetonline.com/HatchetOnline/index.htm

For non-subscribers, you can purchase a subscription for $20 through PayPal and gain access to the entire year's issues, not just this one. So far that means you can download all FOUR issues of 2008!

http://www.hatchetonline.com/HatchetOnl ... ptions.htm

Hard print copies of this issue will soon be available. Check back here for further details . . . .


Happy reading!

Stefani Koorey
Editor and Publisher
The Hatchet: Lizzie Borden's Journal of Murder, Mystery & Victorian History

Once again a NEW discovery graces the cover of the magazine - a new photo of Emma L. Borden!

Congratulations for the great find. The Hatchet has been the leader in uncovering new and interesting Borden material.

Looking forward to reading all the articles. Thanks to all who contribute.

That is absolutely wonderful and exciting!
Our roving reporter/Editor in Fall River scores again!
Wowee!

Wow! Congratulations on the new find! Its amazing how soft and feminine Emma looks in this photo compared with the one we usually see with the harsh shadows. Her eyes have the same look to them like Lizzie's.

Yes, Susan, that was my first thought! I said, those are Lizzie's eyes. And if you look at the left eye, it bears her father's recessed socket as well. I think this image really shows her to be a Borden. She doesn't look at all like her mother, though. Sarah, I always thought, looked ethnic. Dark and mysterious.

The image in the magazine is the best one of the known Emma ever printed. The FRHS granted me permission to print it from their copy. When you put the two photos together, as I did in the article, you can see an exact match. Amazing!!

Yes SUSAN: Placing both photos together tells more than we can probably surmise, but in many ways it can be studied with an attempt at an acute conclusion.

It looks like some years stand between the two photos which I can only guess to be between 5 and 10 years. The "known" photo appears to show an Emma who is more focused, intent, almost steely. Or perhaps it is a look bordering more on the weary, spent or tired.

Non-the-less, considering the time span between the two photos it is interesting to discover how little had changed in her choice of clothing, from the flower below the neck, the ruffle white blouse, to the way she wore her hair.

So, what does the differences or similarities in these photos tell us about Emma?

These two pictures tell us that Emma had a very restricted wardrobe and that she was opposed to change.

If there is a big pile of these unknown pictures that are known to the Hatchet, I hope that they keep coming, but only at the current rate. To give them to us all at once would spoil us and give us less to enjoy later on.

Murder in Gotham---yet another fascinating true crime case study by Richard Behrens. Love how this hatchet murder trial also had “inadmissible” poison evidence.

The new Emma picture---a found missing link between the doe-eyed adolescent and the 30-something woman. One can also see her resemblance to both Andrew & Lizzie. But Stef---HOW & WHERE was the picture found?!

A Woman of Means, And a Past by David Marshall James. A delightful confection with Lizbeth meeting F. Scott & Zelda in NYC. LOVED it.

What Was in Abby’s Pocket---food for thought from Sherry Chapman, as delightful as the thoughts of food in Bridget’s Kitchen (that nasty Liz & her perverted spelling!) Dear Abby was a hoot, as usual (those pesky Churchills!)

Denise Noe’s Elizabeth Montgomery piece was wonderful & brought back memories. My only criticism is that Uncle Arthur was a warlock, not a “wizard” as stated. Well researched & engaging, overall.

Kat’s review of the Ripper documentary makes me further despair the trend toward shock docs with their strange viewpoints & lack of research substance. Never ceases to amaze me how so many production companies manage to get funding, then fail to produce quality work. Such waste.

I wonder if Lizzie ever read A.L. Bixby’s To Lizzie. The book having been published in 1895, she may well have had ample opportunity.

Last page: Gosh I love that fence around the FRHS!

Another great issue people!

Is it just me that does not see the resemblance (other than the clothes and hair)? Has it been proven that it is a picture of Emma? To me, the eyes and the nose does not look like Emma in the older picture.

I am making my way slowly through, but it is apparent that you have come up with another sensational issue of the Hatchet!
I love the fact that both Emma and Lizzie had their own favored pansy pins. One can only wonder if they both received them at the same time--as a gift from Andrew (or, Abbie), perhaps?
Kudos to all for another great issue.

Angel, did you see the accompanying article yet in the journal? You can really see the exactitude there. (is that a word?)

Stuart, Michael Martins says that pansy pins were very common and quite popular. Everyone had them, he said. I was hoping it was a "Borden" thing!

And yes, Fargo, there is more to come. . . .

Yes, ANGEL: Not sure if you are the only one who doesn't see it, but it is her. The eyes look different but that is probably due to aging.

And, if we are to believe that tensions in the Borden house were as stained as many have reported, then one can see how stress may change one's face.

But, if you read the article in this quarters HATCHET and see the test photos, it can not be denied........it is her.

I did the same test as the one Stefani did in the magazine in my computer, that is, to superimpose one photo over the other. Not just the eyes but the distance between all the facial features came together leaving not doubt. The chance it is someone other than Emma.......... improbable. The test and experiments made with the two photos.......... incredible.

The distance between the nose, the ears, lips, chin, cheeks, forehead, etc. are in complete synchronicity. That is, the distance between these parts are the exact distance in both photographs making the chances of it being different people highly unlikely. When you place the photo of the new Emma over the old Emma THE TWO IMAGES MELT INTO ONE.

Add to this that on the reverse side of the photo is stamped with the photographers logo, being South Maine Street JUST A BLOCK-N-HALF FROM 92 SECOND, EMMA'S HOME and that alone adds valuable weight in the way of provenance. A stroke of complete luck that Emma sat for the same pose.

The reason the two photograph's come together so cleanly could have a lot to do with the photographer. Emma could have sat for the same photographer in both photos. If so, that could mean that he has the same photo-room with the same chair, in the same place, having his clients look at the same birdie, on the same wall. Thus, the pose is absolutely the same and the match up as close as you can get.

I think what you see ANGEL is a change in age. It could be as little as 2 or 3 years or as much as 9 or 12.

Looking at a photos of myself over a 10 year span I find great difference especially in the eyes.

Yep, I feel positive. It is Emma.

To place your skepticism in the form of a question makes it a very good question. We must always question.

Wow! Then one can really see that stress and age can be a huge factor. The eyes in the first one seem so innocent and untouched by worry. The second one shows a much altered emotional change, a look that shows more experience with life's hardness. They say the eyes are the mirrors of the soul. It is certainly true in this case.

I definitely have to get this issue.

Yes ANGEL: If you take the expression on both faces there is a big difference in expression and presence. It looks like two different people.

Both faces read and say something totally different.

One says "HELLO, LIFE IS GOOD"

The other says, "OH NO, NOT YOU AGAIN, NOT ANOTHER DAY....I AM SO BORED AND TIRED, GO AWAY.

yes, but . . . .

I think lighting has everything to do with it.

The image I print of the known Emma from the print provided by the FRHS shows this image in a new light---pardon my pun. It is lighter and more clear than any I have ever seen printed, and it helps to soften the dark look we see above.

The jump from one face to the other is less with the better image.

Yes, I agree, the lighting has a tremendous effect on the details. The turn of the head is different by a few small degrees which can also make a big difference. IMO, it is Emma.

And here's something I just ran across - in 1892 Pierre Leduc's barber shop where Andrew Borden was said to have been shaved on the morning of the 4th, was located at 5 South Main the same building as the photo studio was located!

That is a great find Harry. Way cool!

I was just putting together the media kit for The Hatchet and was compiling a list of all our authors through the years

BTW: WE HAVE JUST COMPLETED YEAR FIVE!

and felt a tremendous surge of pride over the list of greats we have had the honor to publish:

Fritz Aldiz, Leonard Rebello, Kat Koorey, Harry Widdows, Sherry Chapman, Annette Holba, Ph.D., Richard Behrens, Shelley Dziedzic, Melissa Allen, Larry Allen, Al Rauber, Mary Elizabeth Naugle, Glen H. Carlson, Neilson Caplain, Thomas Mauriello, Bill Goncalo, Brian Leno, TK Rouse, Pippa Naugle, Loretta Ross, Kathleen Carbone, Mark Amarantes, Sharon Pollock, Tim Evans, Diana Griffiths, Pam Howe, Carolyn Gage, James Gentry, Cynthia Avila, Leonard Pickel, Linda Rodrigues, Sally Campbell, Ron Caplain, Loretta Ross, Michael Martins, Jerry Ross, Denise Noe, Doug Walters, Michael Brimbau, Eugene Hosey, Stefani Koorey, David Marshall James, Aurora Lewis, Stuart Armstrong, and William Schley-Ulrich.

Thanks to all who go to make The Hatchet what it is!

Wow! One of my all-time dreams has come true - that another/more photo(s) of Emma Borden would surface. A lot of people would not have recognized the new Emma photo as being her. She looks so different! GREAT JOB, STEF!

Yes Augusta: it's a great find.

There is stuff out there.

There still exist friends and distant family of the Borden"s who hold a wealth of material the public has never seen. There are sources who have had access to such material and they will be unveiled for us to see in the near future.

Then there is material floating around such as this Emma Photo which was once in the hands of a private collection and which was discovered as it changed hands along with a array of other 19th century photos.

It is interesting to note that within 2 blocks of 92 Second Street between number 5 and 66 South Main Street were 6 separate photography businesses.

Partial quote:

mbhenty @ Thu Dec 04, 2008 11:24 am wrote:It is interesting to note that within 2 blocks of 92 Second Street between number 5 and 66 South Main Street were 6 separate photography businesses.

Yes, it seems to have been a highly competitive business.

The 1882 City Directory shows Mr. Sumner out of the photography business and at the "collateral loan office" at 40 North Main.

He was also residing at 59 Pine Street just a few doors away from Charles J. Holmes at #67. I don't mean to imply any relationship between the two, just found it curious.

Just a note on the photo matching. I had the honor of holding the new Emma photo in my hand this afternoon. One thing that's very clear when looking at the original photo and a good print of the old Emma photo is the matching detail of the ear.

Matching the creases and shapes of the ear is often used to match photos. While ears are not as identical as fingerprints are, they are unique enough to make pretty conclusive identifications.

I was also pretty amazed at how "alive" the subject looked in the original photo as opposed to a reproduction. Although the photo is surprisingly small--think of a wallet-size photo--the detail is pretty incredible.

As always, it was a pleasure to see Stef this afternoon, too. She's a wonderful person and our visit really improved what had been a pretty crappy day 'til then.

I cannot imagine what else will come from Stefani. The prospects are exciting!

Fairhaven Guy, you look like my Uncle Davey (he is very handsome). Congrats on seeing the Emma photo, let alone holding it! A wallet-sized picture, huh? I cannot get over the eye Stef has for zeroing in on these photos.

That was sweet to say, how she made your day less crappy. She is wonderful, and a really good person.

Hi everyone,

Wish I could visit here more often - it's been quite awhile since my last log-in! In any case, I just HAD to chime in with kudos to all involved with The Hatchet - an absolutely fabulous November issue.

The newly discovered Emma photo is so exciting. Makes me wonder what else is lurking as yet undiscovered. I had a thought on a possible reason that some may not see as much of a resemblance as others to the known photo. After studying the two, I'm wondering if one image might be flipped (horizontally, that is). Emma's slightly higher tilted eye & eyebrow seem to be on opposite sides in the two photos. And the hair waves on that side in one photo seems to match the hair waves on the opposite side in the other. Just something to consider

It's so neat to see a more of a resemblance between Emma & Lizzie now. They always seemed so different from each other in appearance, based on the known photos.

Have a great evening!
Andrea

Hi Andrea!

The eyes are incredible. Isolated they are Lizzie's eyes which really floored me because I had not ever seen a resemblance between the two before.

This is just a fabulous issue. The piece on the Helen Jewett murder (I work across the street from Park Row, and I'm planning a "find the spot" walk soon) and the fictional account of Lizbeth's visit to Manhattan are both first-rate. I loved the investigation into Bridget's later life as well. The whole show is something to be proud of, ladies and gentlemen, and you know what a fussbridget...fussBUDGET I am!

What I notice most is that the corners of Emma's mouth turn up slightly, whereas the exact opposite is true of Lizzie. A bit telling, isn't it? Amazing how much our faces give us away.