by Harry Ludlum
When preparing The Haunting of Borley Rectory, the authors asked Sutton for a statement about this incident, which he duly signed and sent to them, but it was omitted. Much of the Sutton material is set out in the detailed report of 1969 by Robert J. Hastings.
The substance of the Sutton business is that after various stone-throwing noises and the crashing brick incident, he grabbed hold of Price, finding, he claimed, pebbles and bricks in Price's pockets, but the most fallacious part of his remarks relate to the suggestion that, when he was challenged, Harry Price stood there looking vacant and mumbled 'What are you going to do?'
So what did really happen?
Once again we turn to Robert J. Hastings for a very likely course of events, related to the state of Price's health. The gist of Hastings' remarks is that Price could only have responded so feebly if he was suffering from an attack such as angina, which of course we know Price suffered from. Further evidence reveals itself firstly in the point that Price continued to be on good terms with Sutton, which he surely would not have done had he realised that Sutton was accusing him of fraud; and secondly, on returning to the Bull at Long Melford, Price sat very silently in the lounge, as though trying to recover from an attack such as angina.
Whereas most people soon forgot about the stone and brick incident, Sutton emphasised it, I feel, out of all proportion. As the matter is extensively covered in the Hastings report, I will leave it there, but it is worth mentioning that when Lord Charles Hope and colleagues visited the Rectory on July 28, and again the following day, Price was ill and did not accompany them!
Price continued with his search for information and it was in June 1930 that he heard the story of the nun at the gate from the carpenter, Fred Cartwright. It has been suggested that this story only came out with the aid of a few timely pints of beer with which the carpenter was plied by Price, but what little evidence exists about Price's meeting with Cartwright seems to indicate that this is groundless.
Price's next visit came after he was visited by the Bull sisters in London, when they suggested that he should visit Borley again in view of fresh happenings surrounding their newly arrived cousin, Lionel Foyster.
But in the meantime, on October 9, 1931, Foyster received a visit from a representative of the Society for Psychical Research, Mr W. H. Salter, who told Foyster that if Price's forthcoming visit could not be deferred, Price should be made to sign an undertaking against publicising the event. Mr Salter also offered the services of the SPR if they were wanted.
It might seem to some readers that he was out of order going behind the back of Price who was also a member of the SPR. In fact, not until the appearance in the Proceedings of the SPR of the material by Dingwall, Goldney and Hall in 1956, and the later counter-examination by Robert J. Hastings in 1969, did the SPR seem to express any interest.
My comments on the Salter visit are a personal opinion on the ethics of trying to persuade the Rev. Foyster to limit or halt another man's investigation and it should not be taken as an attack on Mr W. H. Salter himself. The reservations about Salter's approach concern the principle, not the person.
It was the Foyster period that formed the background to Dingwall, Goldney and Hall's other main thrust in their attack on Price, inasmuch as they asserted that Price was guilty of duplicity in his dealings with Lionel and Marianne Foyster. Although this was comprehensively covered by Robert J. Hastings, some points concerning this period are worth looking at again.
On October 13, 1931 came the visit to Borley by Harry Price and his party and, as quickly as his visits to the Foysters had begun, they were just as quickly thwarted, because it was as a result of what he thought had occurred regarding Marianne and the phenomena that Harry Price and Lionel Foyster parted on bad terms. Had he turned a blind eye or been party to any trickery, the Foyster row would never had arisen.
It is here, in the row with Foyster over the phenomena, that there lies the real answer to the gap in the visits by Price to Borley and his change of views concerning Marianne. As Hastings points out, Price was not able to visit the Rectory for some time, although he was in the district on one occasion in 1932, the reason for which is not recorded, but it may have been on the occasion of the lecture by Price, to which Foyster took exception. Not until 1939, when Price had access to the findings of his chief assistant Sidney Glanville, was he able to resume contact with Lionel Foyster. As a result of those findings, Price altered his opinion of Mrs Foyster and the phenomena, viewing them both in a more favourable light.
In October 1935, Marianne and Lionel Foyster, he now badly crippled and in poor health, left Borley and for some 18 months the Rectory was again empty, until the next period of Price's involvement, this time as a tenant.
By the time a new Rector had been found, the Church authorities had decided that the Rectory would never be used again by a parson, and the new incumbent, the Rev. Alfred Clifford Henning, was instructed to make arrangements for the place to be sold, though this was not the first time that the building had been put on the market.
Accordingly, the parish of Borley and that of nearby Liston were merged, and Henning and his wife moved into Liston Rectory, which survives to this day as a private dwelling. The two parishes, together with that of Bulmer, have now been attached to and administered from, Foxearth Rectory for some years. Interestingly enough, at the time of the Rectory fire, according to his little booklet Haunted Borley, Henning and his wife were staying at Borley Place.
In the interim period, before the Rectory was finally sold to Captain Gregson, to Price's obvious delight, it became possible to rent the place and, by arrangement with the Rev. Henning, he proceeded to do just that.
There has been much criticism over the years, of Price's tenancy of the Rectory, his motives and his direction of the investigating team during that time, but his stated purpose, as he himself saw it, was sensible enough. He told readers of The Most Haunted House in England that he wanted to put in a team of fresh investigators, totally unconnected with all the previous aspects of the story, and people unknown to himself or any of the Rectory's previous occupants.
Apart from setting up the project, Price decided to stay out of the investigation himself and leave it to the new team, with the chief intention of getting an independent assessment of the place and its odd features. He would maintain his interest from outside.
Accordingly, Price now set about finding a team of suitably academic, hard-headed, scientific and sceptical people and he therefore placed an advertisement in The Times, seeking volunteers for the task. The advertisement read as follows:
'Haunted House. Responsible persons of leisure and intelligence, intrepid, critical and unbiased, are invited to join a rota of observers in a year's night and day investigation of alleged haunted house in Home Counties. Printed instructions supplied. Scientific training or ability to operate simple instruments an advantage. House situated in lonely hamlet, so own car is essential. Write Box H989, The Times, EC4.'
As Price himself related, the response was extensive and very mixed. There were, inevitably, scores of bored 'society' types looking for action, cranks and would-be inventors of all sorts of gadgets, out-of-work soldiers and folk expecting to be paid for their services. Inevitably, there were also the ignorant, abusive types ready to pour scorn on the work of someone whose field of knowledge was probably greater than theirs, but out of all these Price found nearly 50 people who might be suitable and these he proceeded to interview.
Nobody was allowed on the team or near the Rectory unless Price had interviewed them first, and he made them sign a declaration form against revealing the results of their work, most particularly to the Press or lay members of the public. Price stated quite openly in his first book that as a legal document he doubted whether the form was worth the paper it was written on, but it was accepted by Price's team on the basis of a gentleman's agreement and Price related that none of his team ever abused his trust over the matter.
Among the team who over t
he next year carried out investigative duties at Borley were the following:
Ellic Howe, Oxford undergraduate.
Sidney Glanville, Professional engineer and draughtsman.
Roger and Helen Glanville, Sidney's son and daughter.
Mark Kerr-Pearse, British pro-consul to Geneva.
Rupert Haigh, a cousin to Mark Kerr-Pearse.
Colonel and Mrs F. C. Westland.
Dr H. F. Bellamy.
Mr de Lotbiniere, BBC engineer.
Mr W. S. Hammond, accompanied by other BBC staff.
Mr and Mrs C. Gordon Glover (Gordon was later known for his Countryside programmes on BBC radio).
Mr and Mrs Lloyd Williams, later to feature in a row about the nun.
Mr M. Savage, an engineer for the fledgling BBC television.
Mr J. M. Bailey.
Mr C. V. Wintour.
Mr S. G. Wells, Oxford undergraduate.
Mr J. Burden, Oxford undergraduate.
Mr T. Stainton, Oxford undergraduate.
Dr C. E. M. Joad, later of Brains Trust fame.
Mr E. Carter Jonas, RAF Flying Officer.
Mr Caunter, RAF Flying Officer.
Mrs F. A. Mansbridge.
Mr A. P. Drinkwater and three colleagues.
The final selection was of about 48, of which is should be said that Mr Sidney H. Glanville was the most dedicated, and who was responsible for accumulating the details that went into the Locked Book of private information relating to the Borley Rectory story.
Two of Price's best-known co-investigators, Roger Glanville and Mark Kerr-Pearse. Roger's father was Sidney Glanville, Price's chief associate.
Prior to the appearance of the advertisement, Harry Price had visited the Rev. Henning at Liston Rectory on Wednesday, May 17, 1937, to tie up financial details, such as the rent, and to arrange for the distribution of the keys. One set of these was deposited with the tenant of the Rectory Cottage at Borley, Mr Arbon, a steamroller driver, with strict instructions that they were only to be given to visitors authorised by Harry Price.
An inspection of Borley Rectory was made during that afternoon, by Price and the Rev. Henning, but nothing unusual was seen or experienced.
The Times advertisement followed, and to effect some control over the conduct of his investigators, Price set out some specific instructions in the controversial Blue Book, a few copies of which still survive.
There were 20 procedures to be followed. In the original copy, various place names were indicated by blanks, partly in line with Price's often argued-over policy of keeping unauthorised persons out of the Rectory and the attendant investigations, but these can now be filled in.
In the context of the time, the case for keeping outsiders at bay could probably be argued either way with equal force, except that if one were conducting such an investigation now it would probably be advisable to keep out the media, or at least attempt to be highly selective, for some cannot unfortunately be trusted to report without sensationalising and invalidating serious investigations.
The general procedure instructions for Price's team ran as follows:
Attend carefully to all written and verbal instructions and carry out to the letter.
Each observer should provide himself with the following articles, in addition to nightclothes, etc.: Notebook, pencils, good watch with second hand, candle and matches, pocket electric torch, brandy flask, sandwiches, etc. If he possesses a camera, this can be used. Rubber- or felt-soled shoes should be worn.
When going on duty, search the house thoroughly, close and fasten all doors and windows. If thought necessary, these can be sealed.
Visit all rooms, etc. at intervals of about one hour, unless circumstances call for your presence in any particular part of the house or grounds. Before going on duty at each period, inspect grounds.
Occasionally extinguish all lights, and wait in complete darkness (varying your observation post), remaining perfectly quiet.
Make a point of taking meals at same times each day or night. Depart from this rule if circumstances warrant.
Make fullest notes of the slightest unusual sound or occurrence.
Take a note of exact times of all sound or happenings, also make notes of your own movements, with exact times. Record weather conditions.
Frequently examine grounds, and, occasionally, watch windows of house from exterior of building.
If with a companion both he and you should act in unison (in order to have a witness), unless circumstances determine otherwise. If several observers present, party can be divided between house and grounds.
For one half-hour before, and a half-hour after dusk, take up position in summerhouse. Remain perfectly quiet, and watch the 'Nun's Walk' on far side of lawn. It is this path that a black, draped figure is said to frequent.
If phenomena appear strong, or if experiencing a succession of unusual events, immediately communicate with one of the persons whose telephone numbers have been handed to you. Detail exact happenings. Expert assistance, or further instructions, will be sent to you.
Establish your base in one room, and keep all your equipment, etc. at this post. This will prevent you hunting for an article when wanted in an emergency.
Keep the electric torch IN YOUR POCKET ALWAYS, whether in or out of the house. Be careful with all lights, matches, cigarette ends, etc.
Should strangers call, be courteous to them. Do not permit them to enter the house; do not encourage them to remain; ON NO ACCOUNT GIVE THEM INFORMATION OR OPINIONS of any sort. This applies to villagers, hotel staff, etc. equally.
Re. meals. You should come provided each day with sandwiches, etc., and hot drinks in a vacuum flask. Rest can be obtained on the camp bed provided, but excellent meals and beds can be procured at The Bull, Long Melford (2½ miles) or at Sudbury (2¼ miles). It should be possible to obtain sufficient rest during the 24 hours, but if two are on duty, take turns at resting, and wake your companion if anything unusual occurs. Leave your car in the appointed place, screened from the road.
When asked to take charge of instruments, examine them regularly with a torch, and record readings and times in notebook. Carefully note anything which may appear unusual. Change charts when necessary, marking on each the time it was changed and date.
Spend at least a portion of the day and night (in complete darkness) in the Blue Room.
No observer is permitted to take a friend to the house, unless permission has been given, and the necessary Declaration Form signed.
Your report and notes should be posted to the Honorary Secretary, University of London Council for Psychical Investigation, 19 Berkeley Street, Mayfair, W1, as soon as possible after you have completed your 'watch'.
At this point, against the frequent criticism of the Blue Book for pre-suggesting phenomena to its readers, the reader's attention is drawn to an important instruction at the very end of the Blue Book, for it will be seen that Price warned his observers of the risk of apparent phenomena originating from natural causes. The instruction reads as follows:
IMPORTANT NOTE
'Although some or all of the above phenomena may be observed, it is very important that the greatest effort should be made to ascertain whether such manifestations are due to normal causes, such as rats, small boys, the villagers, the wind, wood shrinking, the Death Watch beetle, farm animals nosing doors, etc., trees brushing against the windows, birds in the chimney stack or between double walls, etc.'
It makes no sense, in the light of this warning, for Price to have then presented a misleading account of his team's reports, especially when one remembers that he also told his readers where his files were deposited and could be seen! The details that follow, in which Price gave examples of what his team might experience, should be seen in the light of this warning.
Instructions were then included for recording bell-ringing, movement of objects, footsteps, forms or apparitions, raps or knocks, perfumes, lights, disappearances and thermal variations. From this it can be
seen that the framework for extensive scientific quantification was there, but this part of the investigation was not, in my opinion, entered into in sufficient depth.
Records of a number of happenings were indeed kept and the details were no less significant than the experiences of former occupants of the Rectory, but where Price can be reasonably criticised is for not insisting on much greater detail of measuring and timing of phenomena, checking for electrical disturbances, or having some sort of visual graph or scale of the team's work prepared. With the benefit of hindsight, one can see now that the Rectory should have been filled with a wide variety of test equipment.
In order to set up a base room and collect the essential supplies for his team, Harry Price, accompanied by Mr Ellic Howe, motored down to Borley Rectory on June 2, 1937. Having obtained a car-full of supplies from Sudbury and deposited these in the library at the Rectory (chosen as the base room), and made all ship-shape, Price and Howe then inspected the Rectory throughout, and ringed every movable object in the place with chalk.
It was when they entered the Blue Room that they found their first curiosity. Hung up behind the door was a woman's tatty overcoat. In spite of several enquiries in various quarters, nobody seemed to know anything about it. Price left the scruffy souvenir where they had found it and at one stage it was reported to have disappeared entirely and then turned up in another room.
Later in the day, the two men made another inspection of the house and, as evening wore on, they decided to make a night of it. After some time resting in the library, Price and Howe were disturbed by tapping noises coming from the passageway outside the room, but an inspection revealed no obvious cause.
They were later further disturbed by two loud thumps, followed by the sound of a slamming door. Another search, this time of the upstairs quarters, again revealed no obvious cause. The grounds were then inspected and the house watched from the outside for some time without any result. The night had now turned chilly, even though it was June, and abandoning the idea of staying the night, the two men packed and returned to London, leaving the Rectory set up for the forthcoming investigation team, with crockery, books, a lamp and fuel, etc.
