CLOSE
Original image

4 Famous Fires and the Lessons They Taught Us

Original image

October is Fire Prevention Month, but let's face it, fire is deadly and we should be vigilant every month, period. Fire damage to human flesh and property can be devastating, and we should be aware of potential fire hazards and property safety procedures every day of the year. To drive this point home, we now continue a series we started last year that details the not-too-pleasant consequences of fire, and what precautions could have been taken to prevent such a disaster.

1. Cocoanut Grove, November 28, 1942

Boston, Massachusetts

The Cocoanut Grove supper club was located on Piedmont Street, a narrow cobblestoned road near Boston's Park Square theater district. Built in 1927, the main bar (the Melody Lounge) was located in the basement and operated as a blind pig during Prohibition. Once liquor was legal again, the Grove was expanded and by 1942 the ground floor consisted of a large dining room, a bandstand, and several smaller bar areas off the main dining room.


Accident Waiting to Happen
The Cocoanut Grove was festooned with Casablanca-type décor: fake palm trees made of flammable material that doubled as lamps, with yards of lush fabric draped along the walls and from the ceiling (some of which obscured the exit signs). The main entrance to the club was a single revolving door. Many of the alternate exits had been locked to prevent patrons from sneaking out without paying their tabs. The posted maximum capacity of the club was 460, yet there were over 1,000 patrons in attendance the night of November 28.


The Fire

Even though the official report lists the origin of the fire as "undetermined," most eyewitness accounts report that at around 10:15 p.m. a 16-year-old busboy had been ordered by management to replace a light bulb in one of the "palm trees" in the basement Melody Lounge that had been removed by a patron. Unable to find the light socket in the dark, the busboy struck a match in order to illuminate his working area. Moments later, several patrons watching the busboy noticed the decorations changing color. Suddenly the palm tree burst into flames and several waiters attempted to extinguish it with seltzer bottles. Patrons started rushing for the four foot wide staircase that led to the main floor. The ceiling drapes and furniture quickly caught fire, and toxic fumes filled the room. When the door to the main floor was finally opened, a fireball rolled up the stairs and burst into the foyer. Cries of "Fire!" erupted and most of the crowd rushed to the revolving door in an attempt to flee. The door quickly became clogged with an influx of hysterical patrons, and rescue personnel would later tearfully describe the scene as "people piled up like potato sacks." Those who had managed to escape had done so by following Cocoanut Grove employees who were familiar with corridors leading to the few unlocked (and unmarked) exit doors. Even though the firefighting crews (26 engine companies and five ladder companies) responded very quickly to extinguish the blaze, the major human damage had already been done, thanks to toxic fumes. The fire claimed 492 lives and seriously injured 166 survivors.

The Aftermath
The Cocoanut Grove tragedy led to some medical advances as well as building code revisions. Penicillin had not yet been tried on non-test subjects at that time, but doctors used it on Cocoanut Grove victims in an attempt to ward off infection. Its success helped to accelerate production of the drug for further study. The influx of so many burn victims at major Boston hospitals at one time led to major advances in several sub-specialties of burn treatment, including fluid retention, infection prevention, and respiratory trauma. Structurally speaking, new laws were enacted nationwide that mandated all revolving doors must be fitted with two outward-opening doors on each side, and decorations for public buildings had to be non-combustible. In addition, laws regarding illuminated exit signs and unlocked emergency exit doors, kept free of blockage by tables or decorations or any other obstructions, were added to the books.

2. MGM Grand Hotel, November 21, 1980

Las Vegas, Nevada

The MGM Grand Hotel was located on the famous "Strip" at the corner of East Flamingo Road and Las Vegas Boulevard. It had opened in late 1973 and consisted of a large ground floor area that included the casino, show rooms, and several restaurants, and a below-ground "Arcade" level which housed shops, boutiques, a movie theater, service areas, and underground parking. The 26-story "high-rise" portion of the building was the hotel itself, which contained 2,083 guest rooms.


Accident Waiting to Happen
During construction, the hotel owners had skimped on, of all things, sprinkler systems. Installing sprinklers in the casino and the Deli restaurant (where the fire originated) would have added an additional $192,000 to the cost of the $106 million project. Savvy attorneys had found a loophole in the fire code: if an establishment was open for business 24 hours per day, ceiling sprinklers were not mandatory, because (supposedly) someone would always be in attendance to sound an alarm and initiate extinguishment. There were no smoke alarms or automatic fire alarms within the complex; there were manual pull-stations ("In case of fire, pull here") on each guest floor of the hotel, but they were rigged to contact the hotel switchboard, not the fire department.


The Fire
The Deli, a restaurant located at the east end of the Casino level, was open 24 hours a day when the MGM Grand first opened, but had since reduced its operating hours. Around 7:00 a.m. on November 21, an employee arriving for work cut through the then-closed Deli as per his usual routine and heard a "crackling" sound. He stepped in further and saw flames shooting up from a service station to the ceiling. He dialed security from a nearby phone and was asked, "Is it enough to roll the fire department?" he responded in the affirmative and then broke the glass to a nearby emergency fire hose and started to unwind it when a security guard rushed in and advised him against using water on an electrical fire. (It was later determined that the fire had started inside a nearby wall by faulty wiring used to refrigerate a food display cabinet.) In that short time, the smoke had become so thick that the two were forced to leave the building via some nearby fire exit doors. The flames spread rapidly, fed by the glue used for the decorative wallpaper and tiles throughout the building, which in turn filled the casino and hotel corridors with toxic fumes. The "eye in the sky" tunnel above the casino—used to house surveillance cameras—lacked any smoke dampers, which enabled black clouds to quickly permeate the building's air circulation system, spreading deadly fumes into the high-rise section of the complex. Of the 84 people who perished, only four died from burns; the rest died of smoke inhalation, many in their sleep (due to the lack of audible alarms).

The Aftermath
Investigators concluded that, at first ignition, the MGM Grand incident would have been a "one sprinkler fire" had proper equipment been in place. That is, the flames would have been contained and extinguished if The Deli had been outfitted with a sprinkler system. As a result, a new law went into effect in Las Vegas that required every casino to be retro-fitted with sprinkler systems. Additionally, stricter regulations were put into place regarding functional smoke dampers in all ductwork, as well as a proviso mandating that all public facilities in Clark County undergo a thorough fire safety inspection every two years.

3. Iroquois Theater, December 30, 1903

Chicago, Illinois

Located on W. Randolph Street, between State and Dearborn, the majestic six-story Iroquois Theater was described in promotional literature as a "virtual temple of beauty" and "absolutely fireproof." the latter description might seem like an unusual boast today, but at that time many folks in Chicago still had vivid memories of the Great Fire which had swept through their city 35 years prior. The Iroquois had three large audience levels and seated 1,790 people.


Accident Waiting to Happen
Despite the theater management's fire safety guarantee, a Chicago fire department captain noticed during a pre-opening inspection that the building had no sprinkler system, no water connections, no fire extinguishers, and an inadequate number of exits. Most of the decorative trim was made of wood and the only firefighting equipment on hand were six canisters of a powdered chemical called "Kilfyre," which was commonly used on household chimney fires. He reported his findings to the Fire Marshall, who told him to forget about it: even if the information was relayed to the "syndicate" that owned the building, nothing would be done. The theater held its grand opening as scheduled on November 23, 1903.


The Fire
It was bitingly cold that Wednesday afternoon. The matinee show on December 30 was "standing room only," meaning that the theater had oversold the tickets and there were almost 2,000 people in the audience, many literally standing in the aisles. Headliner Eddie Foy would later remember that his first impression when he took the stage that day was that there seemed to be nothing but women and children in the audience, which made sense since it was a weekday afternoon—the school kids were on their Christmas break and most of the men were at work. The second act of Mr. Bluebeard had just begun at 3:15 p.m., and the chorus was on stage singing and dancing while the pit orchestra played "In the Pale Moonlight." High above the stage, out of sight of the audience, thousands of square feet of painted canvas scenery flats hung suspended by ropes. A stagehand noticed one of those flats brush against a hot reflector behind a calcium arc spotlight. When a small flame erupted, he tried to douse it with Kilfyre, but the fire was just beyond his reach. Within moments the fire spread, spraying rivulets of flame onto the velvet stage curtains and flammable props. Crew members tried to lower the protective asbestos curtain, but it got caught on a special wire that had been strung near the ceiling (for use in a Peter Pan-type flying fairy act in the show) and wouldn't budge. Actors rushed to exit via the stage doors, and when those doors were opened, the sudden burst of cold air that rushed in forced the fireball from the stage into the audience area. The doors leading from the balcony to the downstairs area had been locked to prevent patrons from sneaking down to better seats. Many of the exit doors on the main floor were concealed by heavy drapery, and those doors that the panicked audience members did find opened inward, so they were useless against the crush of the crowd. Firefighters extinguished the blaze within 30 minutes, but when rescue personnel eventually managed to get the various theater doors open, they were stunned to find bodies stacked seven feet high. The initial blaze killed 575 people, and an additional 27 people succumbed to their injuries during the week following the fire.

The Aftermath
Dozens of people, from the theater owners to the mayor of Chicago, were indicted after the fire but all of their cases were eventually dismissed on technicalities. The mayor ordered 170 theaters, churches, and public halls closed for several months so that all could be inspected and retro-fitted with such safety devices as outward-opening doors, illuminated exit signs, and steelfire curtains. None of the victims' families ever received any sort of financial compensation after the tragedy, and many of them faced further financial hardship when the mayor's forced closing of so many venues left 6,000 people unemployed.

4. Haunted Castle, Six Flags Great Adventure, May 11, 1984

Jackson Township, New Jersey

The Haunted Castle was a walk-through dark ride designed to frighten customers. Visitors had to feel their way along a dimly lit maze of corridors and were confronted en route by spooky props, monstrous mannequins, and park employees dressed as Dracula and other scary creatures.


Accident Waiting to Happen
While the actual human toll in this case is a mere fraction of other famous fires, it deserves mention because it occurred in a very common type of venue that is frequented by millions of visitors every year, and one where most of us have seen people disobeying "no smoking" signs or tinkering with equipment to amuse their friends. Certainly none of the parents who bid their teens good-bye that May afternoon thought that would be the last time they'd ever see them. What could happen at an amusement park?


Even though the Haunted Castle had been in place for five years, it was still considered a "temporary structure" by township authorities since it was comprised of several inter-connected semi-trailers. As a result, the Castle was exempt from most of the fire laws applied to permanent structures. It was not equipped with sprinklers or smoke or fire alarms. The mazes inside the trailers were constructed of plywood and tar paper, and the various props were made of foam rubber, fabric, and wax. Some of the walls in the darkest parts of the maze were covered in polyurethane as a cushion, since so many patrons bumped into them. Vandalism became an increasing concern; so many of the actors (employees dressed in costume) had been assaulted by rowdy teenagers that a clause promising criminal prosecution for such an act was added to the posted rules of the Castle. The illuminated signs over the emergency exits had been destroyed so many times by vandals that the park had stopped replacing them. The alcoves where certain costumed actors (like the Hunchback) lurked were eventually fenced in, to prevent visitors with hijinks in mind from climbing inside. Sadly, these same alcoves were equipped with emergency exits which, due to the next protective grating, were inaccessible by the general public.

The Fire
To avoid congestion and bottlenecks, Castle employees at the entrance only allowed small groups of patrons in at one time, then waited several minutes before letting the next group proceed. There were 25 visitors and four employees inside the castle at 6:35 that Friday evening. A 14-year-old boy, whose name has never been released publicly, was using a cigarette lighter to illuminate the way down a darkened corridor for himself and a companion. The pair stumbled in the blackness and bumped into the protective foam padding, which caught fire from the lighter. The boy tried to beat down the flame with his hands, but it spread quickly, fueled by the flammable accoutrements and the oxygen pumped via the air conditioning vents, and he and his friend ran back toward the entrance and escaped. Their cries of "Fire!" prompted an employee to go inside and investigate. (It wasn't uncommon for mischievous visitors to set off smoke bombs in the Castle, which is why an emergency alarm wasn't sent out immediately.) The actor playing "The Butcher" smelled the smoke, jumped from his post, and led a group of patrons outside to safety. A group of nine high school friends who were deeper inside the attraction at first thought the smoke was part of the show. But when the fumes became overwhelming, they dropped to their knees and attempted to crawl toward an exit, even though visibility was nil. One of the group, 14-year-old Suzette Elliott, managed to grope her way close enough to the entrance, where an employee found her and carried her out to safety. Once the fire had been extinguished, rescue workers found the bodies of eight teens in two groups inside one of the trailers, all with their faces pressed against the air conditioning grates cut into the floor.

The Aftermath
During the resulting criminal trial, several Castle employees testified that they'd complained to management about the safety hazards inside the attraction—the missing light bulbs, the torn crash pads on the walls that were spilling exposed foam rubber. The two park executives who'd been charged with manslaughter avoided trial by agreeing to attend an intervention program which prescribed them a lengthy stretch of community service. The year following the fire Six Flags Great Adventure management assured prospective patrons that the $5.2 million worth of sprinklers and computerized smoke and heat detectors that had been newly installed in all their enclosed attractions would prevent another such tragedy.

It probably can't be repeated too many times — if you live in a dorm or apartment building and you see bikes and other clutter being stored on a landing near an exit door, report it. If you see some prankster smoking where they're not supposed to, or propping open a fire door, or disabling a smoke alarm in a common area, be that cranky spoilsport and report it. Being that "hey you kids, get off my lawn" guy now is better than having to grope your way to a blocked exit through toxic black smoke while breathing superheated air later.

Original image
Paramount Pictures
arrow
entertainment
11 Surprising Facts About Fatal Attraction
Original image
Paramount Pictures

Written by James Dearden and directed by Adrian Lyne, 1987’s Fatal Attraction showed audiences just how dangerous sex could be. Michael Douglas plays Dan Gallagher, a married man who has a weekend-long affair with single career woman Alex Forrest, played by Glenn Close. When he breaks off their affair, Alex goes a little nuts. Despite drawing the ire of feminists and frightening men everywhere, the film grossed an impressive $320 million worldwide, earned six Oscar nominations (including one for Close), and ranks number one in the “Psycho/Stalker/Blank from Hell” genre. Here are 11 scintillating facts about the movie, which was released 30 years ago today.

1. THE MOVIE IS BASED ON THE SCREENWRITER’S SHORT FILM.

In 1980, Fatal Attraction screenwriter James Dearden wrote and directed a short film called Diversion. “I was sitting at home thinking, ‘What is a minimalist story that I can do?’ My wife was out of town for the weekend, and I thought what would happen if a man who has just dropped his wife at the railroad station rings this girl who he's met at a party and says, ‘Would you like to have dinner?’” he told The New York Times. “It’s a little fable about the perils of adultery. It is something that men and women get away with 99 percent of the time, and I just thought, ‘Why not explore the one time out of 100 when it goes wrong?’”

Fatal Attraction producers Sherry Lansing and Stanley Jaffe saw the short and asked Dearden to elaborate on the story. “To turn it into a mass-audience film, I knew there would have to be an escalation of the psychological violence, which in the end becomes physical,” Dearden explained. He says he wasn’t trying to make a social statement about AIDS, but he was trying to say “we can have the most intimate sexual relationships with somebody we know nothing about.”

2. GLENN CLOSE WANTED TO PLAY AGAINST TYPE.

By the time Fatal Attraction came around, Glenn Close was a three-time Oscar nominee who had never been asked to play a sexy role. “When Glenn made it known she was prepared to test, I became fascinated with the idea of using her,” Adrian Lyne told People. “She’s a person you’d least expect to have this passion and irrational obsession. When she and Michael tested, an extraordinary erotic transformation took place. She was this tragic, bewildering mix of sexuality and rage—I watched Alex come to life.” 

Close recalled her nerve-racking audition to Entertainment Weekly: “My hair was long and crazy. I’m very bad at doing my hair. I got so nervous, I took a little bit of a Valium. I walked in and the first thing I saw was a video camera, which is terrifying, and behind the video camera in the corner was Michael Douglas. I just said, ‘Well, just let it all go wild.”’

A year after Fatal Attraction’s release, Close kept the sexiness going in Dangerous Liaisons, which garnered her yet another Oscar nod.

3. ADRIAN LYNE WANTED TO DO A DIFFERENT TYPE OF SEX SCENE.

According to Lyne, the only thing audiences remember about the movie is the spontaneous and somewhat goofy kitchen sink sex scene. “But what people take away from the movie is not Glenn Close putting acid on the car or even the last 10 minutes when they are flailing around in the bathroom,” he told MovieMaker Magazine. “What they remember is Michael f*cking her over the sink early on—which was like 30 seconds—and another 30 seconds of them making out in the elevator … but there’s another two hours and five minutes! And I guess it worked or they wouldn’t have gone to the movie.”

In John Andrew Gallagher’s book Film Directors on Directing, Lyne said he didn’t want the love scene to take place in a bed “because it’s so dreary, and I thought about the sink because I remembered I had once had sex with a girl over a sink, way back. The plates clank around and you’ll have a laugh. You always need to have a laugh in a sex scene.” During filming he yelled at the couple, praising them. “If they know that they’re turning you on, it builds their confidence.” He used a handheld camera to film it “so there was no problem with the heat going out of the scene.”

4. CLOSE HAD A HUGE PROBLEM WITH THE NEW ENDING.

Paramount Pictures

Two endings of the film were shot: The first had Alex planting Dan’s fingerprints on a knife and then killing herself while Madama Butterfly played in the background. Test audiences felt unsatisfied, so Paramount decided to re-shoot the ending and make it more violent. They had Dan’s wife, Beth (Anne Archer)—the only untainted character—shockingly shoot and kill Alex as a statement on preserving the American family.

“When I heard that they wanted to make me into basically a psychopath, where I go after someone with a knife rather than somebody who was self-destructive and basically tragic, it was a profound problem for me because I did a lot of research about the character,” Close told Oprah. “So to be brought back six months later and told, ‘You’re going to totally change that character,’ it was very hard. I think I fought against it for three weeks. I remember we had meetings. I was so mad.”

In Entertainment Weekly, Close said she thought Alex was a deeply disturbed woman, but not a psychopath. “Once you put a knife in somebody’s hand, I thought that was a betrayal of the character,” she explained. The main reason the ending was changed was because moviegoers wanted revenge. “The audience wanted somebody to kill her,” Michael Douglas told Entertainment Weekly. “Otherwise the picture was left—for lack of a better expression—with blue balls.” Though audiences wanted Alex dead, Douglas saw that as a compliment. “You were so good in the part that everybody wanted you to be killed,” he told Close on Oprah.

In hindsight, Close thinks they did the right thing in changing the ending. “Bloodshed in a dramatic sense brings catharsis,” she told Entertainment Weekly. “Shakespeare did it. The Greeks did it. That’s what we did. We gave the audience my blood. It worked.”

5. THE MOVIE CAUSED THE PHRASE “BUNNY BOILER” TO BECOME A PART OF THE LEXICON.

In probably the most disturbing scene in the movie, Alex boils Dan’s kid’s pet bunny. The phrase is listed in Urban Dictionary and on the U.K. site Phrases.org. Urban defines it as “after a relationship break-up, the person who wants some kind of revenge, like stalking, or harassment,” and Phrases says, “an obsessive and dangerous female, in pursuit of a lover who has spurned her.” Close herself was uneasy about the scene. “The only thing that bothered me was the rabbit,” she said on Oprah. “I thought it was over the top.”

6. CLOSE HAD THE KNIFE SHE TRIED TO KILL MICHAEL DOUGLAS WITH FRAMED.

In the theatrical ending of the movie, Alex comes after Dan with a knife but doesn’t succeed in getting away with murder. Close told Vanity Fair that she framed the fake knife, and that it’s hanging in her kitchen. “It’s all an illusion. It’s a cardboard prop!” she said. It’s also a rather creepy reminder of the film.

7. THE MOVIE SAVED MORE THAN A FEW MARRIAGES.

The film shows what happens when a married man lets his guard down and embarks on an affair, only to have it destroy his life. “That movie struck a very, very raw nerve,” Close told Daily Mail. “Feminists hated the movie and that was shocking to me. They felt they'd been betrayed because it was a single, working woman who was supposed to be the source of all evil. But now Alex is considered a heroine. Men still come up to me and say, ‘You scared the s**t outta me.’ Sometimes they say, ‘You saved my marriage.’”

8. CLOSE WOULD PLAY ALEX DIFFERENTLY TODAY.

One of the reasons the film was so controversial is the negative way it depicted mental illness. Psychiatrists have said Alex suffered from erotomania, a condition in which a person wrongly believes a person is in love with them. Close spoke to two psychiatrists in preparation for her role, and neither said Alex’s behavior—especially the bunny-boiling—was because of mental illness. “Never did a mental disorder come up. Never did the possibility of that come up,” Close told CBS News. “That, of course, would be the first thing I would think of now.” She also said, “I would have a different outlook on that character. I would read that script totally differently.”

9. DEARDEN ADAPTED FATAL ATTRACTION INTO A PLAY, WITH THE ORIGINAL ENDING INTACT.

In 2014 a stage version of the movie went up in London, starring Natascha McElhone as Alex and Kristin Davis as the long-suffering wife, Beth. Dearden reimagined the script in making Alex more sympathetic, Dan more blameworthy, and returning to the original ending.

“[I] wanted to return to my original conception of the characters in a sense to set the record straight,” Dearden told The Atlantic. “Because while Alex is undeniably borderline psychotic, she is also a tragic figure, worn down by a series of disappointments in love and the sheer brutality of living in New York as a single woman in a demanding career. So whilst remaining faithful to the storyline, I have introduced the ambivalence of my earlier drafts … nobody is entirely right and nobody entirely wrong.”

10. DEARDEN AND CLOSE DON’T BELIEVE ALEX IS A MONSTER.

“Alex is emphatically not a monster,” Dearden wrote in The Guardian. “She is a sad, tragic, lonely woman, holding down a tough job in an unforgiving city. Alex is not a study in madness. She is a study in loneliness and desperation.” He goes on to write that he regrets “that audiences shouted ‘Kill the bitch!’ at the screen … Did Fatal Attraction really set back feminism and career women? I honestly don’t believe so. I think that, arguably, it encouraged a vigorous debate from which feminism emerged, if anything, far stronger.”

Close doesn’t see Alex as monstrous either. “I never thought of her as the villain, ever,” she said on Oprah.

11. A TV VERSION OF FATAL ATTRACTION WAS KILLED.

In 2015 it was reported that Paramount would be bringing the film to the small screen in what was described as “a one-hour event TV series.” Mad Men producers Maria and André Jacquemetton were set to write and executive produce the show, with Deadline writing that the TV version would show how “a married man’s indiscretion comes back to haunt him,” just like in the movie. The show was set to air on Fox. But in early 2017, it was announced that the project was being killed—at least by Fox—after the producers encountered troubles with both the title and casting (The Hollywood Reporter wrote that both Megan Fox and Jenna Dewan Tatum were both said to have passed on the project.)

Original image
Getty Images (Johnson) / iStock (ghosts)
arrow
History
When Lexicographer Samuel Johnson Became a Ghostbuster
Original image
Getty Images (Johnson) / iStock (ghosts)

Dr. Samuel Johnson is today best known for his Dictionary of the English Language (1755), which remained the foremost authority on the English language until the Oxford English Dictionary appeared more than a century later. The dictionary took Johnson nine years to complete, for which he was paid the princely sum of 1500 guineas—equivalent to $300,000 (or £210,000) today. Although it wasn’t quite the commercial success its publishers hoped it would be, it allowed Johnson the freedom to explore his own interests and endeavors: He spent several years editing and annotating his own editions of all of Shakespeare’s plays, and traveled extensively around Britain with his friend (and eventual biographer) James Boswell—and, in 1762, helped to investigate a haunted house.

Johnson—who was born on this day in 1709 and is the subject of today's Google Doodle—had a lifelong interest in the paranormal, once commenting that he thought it was “wonderful” that it was still “undecided whether or not there has ever been an instance of the spirit of any person appearing after death. All argument is against it, but all belief is for it.” According to Boswell, however, he was more of a skeptic than an out-and-out believer, and refused to accept anything without seeing the evidence for himself. So when the news broke of an apparently haunted house just a few streets away from his own home in central London, Johnson jumped at the chance to perhaps see a ghost with his own eyes.

The haunting began in the early 1760s, when a young couple, William and Fanny Kent, began renting a room from a local landlord, Richard (or William—sources disagree, but for clarity, we'll use Richard) Parsons, at 25 Cock Lane in Smithfield, London. Soon after the Kents moved in, Richard’s daughter, Betty, began to hear strange knocking and scratching sounds all around the house, and eventually claimed to have seen a ghost in her bedroom.

Richard soon discovered that William was a widower and that Fanny was in fact his deceased wife's sister; under canon law, the pair couldn't be married, and Richard became convinced that the ghost must be that of William's deceased first wife, Elizabeth, blaming William’s presence in the house for all of the strange occurrences. He promptly evicted the Kents and the noises soon subsided—but when Fanny also died just a few weeks later, they immediately resumed and again seemed to center around Betty. In desperation, a series of séances were held at the Cock Lane house, and finally Fanny’s ghost supposedly confirmed her presence by knocking on the table. When questioned, Fanny claimed that William had killed her by poisoning her food with arsenic—an accusation William understandably denied.

By now, news of the Cock Lane Ghost had spread all across the city, and when the story broke in the press, dozens of curious Londoners began turning up at the house, queuing for hours outside in the street hoping to see any sign of supernatural activity. According to some accounts, Parsons even charged visitors to come in and “talk” to the ghost, who would communicate with knocks and other disembodied noises.

But with the suspicion of murder now in the air, the Cock Lane haunting changed from a local curiosity into a full-blown criminal investigation. A committee was formed to examine the case, and Johnson was brought in to record their findings and investigate the case for himself.

On February 1, 1762, one final séance was held with all members of the committee—Johnson included—in attendance. He recorded that:

About 10 at night the gentlemen met in the chamber in which the girl [Betty] supposed to be disturbed by a spirit had, with proper caution, been put to bed by several ladies. They sat rather more than an hour, and hearing nothing, went down stairs, when they interrogated the father of the girl, who denied, in the strongest terms, any knowledge or belief of fraud … While they were enquiring and deliberating, they were summoned into the girl’s chamber by some ladies who were near her bed, and who had heard knocks and scratches. When the gentlemen entered, the girl declared that she felt the spirit like a mouse upon her back.

But the committee were suspicious. Betty was asked to hold out her hands in front of her, in sight of everyone in the room:

From that time—though the spirit was very solemnly required to manifest its existence by appearance, by impression on the hand or body of any present, by scratches, knocks, or any other agency—no evidence of any preternatural power was exhibited.

Johnson ultimately concluded that it was “the opinion of the whole assembly that the child has some art of making or counterfeiting a particular noise, and that there is no agency of any higher cause.” And he was right.

As the investigation continued, it was eventually discovered that Richard Parsons had earlier borrowed a considerable amount of money from William Kent that he had no means (nor apparently any intention) of repaying. The two men had a falling out, and Parsons set about elaborately framing Kent for both Fanny and Elizabeth's deaths. The ghostly scratching and knocking noises had all been Betty’s work; she hidden a small wooden board into the hem of her clothing with which to tap or scratch on the walls or furniture when prompted.

The Parsons—along with a servant and a preacher, who were also in on the scam—were all prosecuted, and Richard was sentenced to two years in prison.

Although the Cock Lane haunting turned out to be a hoax, Johnson remained open minded about the supernatural. “If a form should appear,” he later told Boswell, “and a voice tell me that a particular man had died at a particular place, and a particular hour, a fact which I had no apprehension of, nor any means of knowing, and this fact, with all its circumstances, should afterwards be unquestionably proved, I should, in that case, be persuaded that I had supernatural intelligence imparted to me.”

SECTIONS

arrow
LIVE SMARTER
More from mental floss studios