Script Excerpt: Post Burial Remembrance
March 31, 2008
Here’s an excerpt from one of two scripts I’ve written on the Lizzie Borden case. I scheduled some automatic launches of blog entries during my Italy trip and this will be the first. And they aren’t all from the script….watch for letters in my collection from Bordens.
The Court herewith orders that you be discharged of this indictment and go thereof without day.
EXT. OAK GROVE CEMETERY – THE ANDREW BORDEN PLOT – DUSK
WORDS ON SCREEN: “ONE YEAR LATER”
We see Lizzie and Emma looking at the new 10-foot high monument they have recently had placed across from the graves of their father, mother, baby Alice, and Abby. The monument is carved with all their names, dates of birth, dates of death.
Promise me Lizzie that … when the time comes…you will not have me buried next to Abby. Promise me that you will have me buried closer to father’s headstone.
Of course, Emma. I promise. And when the time comes, I shall have myself buried next to you.
Lizzie looks back up at the monument and remembers:
EXT. SWANSEA – BANKS OF COLES RIVER
Lizzie is about 12 years old and is sitting on the grass with Andrew. It is a beautiful, peaceful day. They hold fishing poles and he is helping her attach sinkers.
ANDREW
I remember when you were just so high and I first taught you to fish. My lands girl, but you took to it so. Smartest little angler I ever saw. You caught three fish your first time and you were mighty excited.
Andrew laughs and puts his arm around Lizzie. She tilts her head so it braces against his arm.
Never could get Emma to get the hang of it. But you’ve always been a quick learner, Lizzie. Now don’t pull it too tight, just a little more here. I figure we can catch our dinner tonight. What do you say?
If I put my mind to it, Father, I can. If I put my mind to it, I can do most anything. How many fish do you want me to catch?
As many as you want Lizzie, as many as you want.
DISSOLVE
INT. MAPLECROFT – LIZZIE’S BEDROOM
Lizzie Borden’s Grand Tour Money Shortage
March 20, 2008
On June 21, 1890 Lizzie Borden embarked on a 19 week Grand Tour of Europe. A month and two days later, she would celebrate her 30th birthday while on that Tour. It must have been her best birthday ever. However, according to reports, she would also have to wire home for additional funds, a necessary appeal that must have been a source of great embarrassment to her considering her travel companions.
Lizzie was enjoying the thrilling sights of England, Scotland, France, and Italy with sisters Carrie Lindley Borden and Anna Howland Borden, daughters of Colonel Thomas J. Borden (of the “Greater Bordens” and related to Lizzie, albeit somewhat distantly); Elizabeth Hitchcock Brayton, daughter of David Anthony Brayton, (and who later owned and resided in the structure which is now the Fall River Historical Society); Sarah Brayton; Ellen “Nellie” Shove, whose father was President of the Shove Mill; and a chapperone, Miss Cox. Lizzie was truly emershed with the upper crust, i.e., “the cultured girls” who lived on the coveted “Hill”, i.e, the Highlands of Fall River’s elite.
Lizzie certainly didn’t have the cash on hand her companions did for purchasing souveniers. It has been reported she brought home common reprints of cathedrals and famous paintings, but its likely Carrie, Anna, Sarah and Elizabeth bought more expensive items such as fine lace, small sculptures, perhaps even designer clothing. So when Lizzie, who always had a keen eye for quality and exquisite taste found herself cash strapped, it has been reported she wired home for more.
Below is a page from the September 17, 1892 The Illustrated American telling us something a little different and who actually sent her the money needed for her return passage. (Right click image for easier reading and note yellow highlight). I have several issues of The Illustrated American from this era and have found their reporting to be remarkably accurate. However, I find it curious that her passage would not have been booked as “round trip” in the first place. Perhaps the ladies had not booked return passage when they arranged to begin their journey. After all, crossings were frequent and if they decided to return “sometime in November”, there would be plenty of time (and for most of them, plenty of cash) to purchase the return fare.
This issue was released after the Coroner’s Inquest (August 9-11) and the Preliminary Hearing (August 25-31), and Borden scholars will recognize precise testimony from those proceedings.
It is my long time personal belief that it was this trip – the first abroad for Lizzie – that changed her forever. She was transformed during those four months into a woman who, having lived the life of what money could bring – i.e., fine food in restaurants, hot running water, luxurious bathtubs, culture – became steeled in her determination to “have more.” (See my essay in Jules Rychebusch’s Proceedings book of the 1992 Lizzie Borden Conference, “Why We Don’t Know Lizzie”). Less than a year after her return to her unstylish home below “the Hill” in Fall River, the Borden house was burglarized in broad daylight. Shortly after that, Emma “offered” Lizzie her larger bedroom. A year after that Andrew and Abby were murdered. And a year after that – Lizzie, indeed, got “more”.
ÓÓ
In the same issue, which is extensive about the Borden case up to that date, are the following images we have become familiar with. The top photo shows the Borden house and part of the Churchill house to the left. This photo was used for the cover of Marie Belloc Lowndes book: Lizzie Borden – A Study in Conjecture.
What has always puzzled me is what exactly is that thing outside the fence in front of Mrs. Churchill’s house? This is the clearest photograph I have seen and I still can’t figure it out. Couldn’t be a resting spot to tie up a carriage because it is set too far back on the sidewalk. Anyway, it’s driven me nuts for years so if anybody knows, please enlighten me.
THE PRIVY IN THE BARN
March 19, 2008
Note: See comment by “Fiz” below.
“Did Lizzie Borden Dispose of the Murder Weapon By Dropping it in the Privy of the Borden Barn?”
by
Faye Musselman
“I am not at all satisfied that any such search has been made for the weapon as absolutely to exclude the presence of it somewhere on the premises. But to make an absolutely thorough search for it might involve the total destruction of the buildings; and this, doubtless, is not worthwhile, especially as the weapon when found cannot absolutely settle the identify (sic) of the murderer.”
-Knowlton Papers, pgs. 61-62. Final paragraph of a letter written by Attorney General Pillsbury to District Attorney Hosea Knowlton, dated 9/3/1892
The most puzzling and compelling case in the annals of American murder mysteries is the Lizzie Borden case of 1892, Fall River, Massachusetts. Less challenging to the vox populi mind of “Did She or Didn’t She?” is the challenge of figuring out what happened to the murder weapon. No weapon was ever found, though it is documented the house was searched “from top to bottom”, as was the barn.
Lizzie stated to investigating police officers that she was in the barn. She testified at the Coroner’s Inquest that she was in the barn.
She was allegedly seen coming from the barn walking towards the side door by 19 year old (and, amazingly, a future renter of 92 Second Street) ice cream peddler, Hyman Lubinsky. (Trial testimony)
The murder weapon has never been found. The “handlless hatchet” found in the cellar in a box on a high shelf covered in ash was presented at Trial as a possible weapon. Governor Robinson, Lizzie’s primary defense attorney, quotes prosecuting attorney William Moody’s opening remarks: “The government does not insist that these homicides were committed by this handleless hatchet: it may have been the weapon.” (Trial Transcript, Vol II).
So if we presume the handless hatchet is NOT the murder weapon – then what happened to it? And, presuming Lizzie’s guilt, what did she do with it?
Primary source document testimony that the barn privy was searched reveals no conclusive, let alone convincing, evidence that the privy was searched thoroughly, i.e., the “muck and guck”, so to speak.
The barn contained an old fashioned privy – an indoor outhouse if you will. Unlike the two privies in the Borden house basement which had a flushing capacity, the barn privy did not. It had a sink hole. It was used as we have testimony that Mrs. Borden used it occasionally, so we know it was not sealed up.
In this view we see the barn door and a little further east (darker shape) the privy door.
In the late 1920’s the Borden barn was dismantled and the local papers covered the event. While an old carpenters hammer, something like a hatchet, was found between beams on the inside wall, it clearly was not the murder weapon. For one thing, the length of the blade was too long, and the City of Fall River paid $200 to have it tested for blood. The results were negative. The writer has been unable to find any newspaper record stating the privy itself was drained or searched. The “muck and guck” would have been dissolved and absorbed into the earth, and most likely the wooden hatchet handle itself, but the metal hatchet head would not have disintegrated. It would still be there. However, it does not appear the “sink hole” was searched.
When the Leary Press was constructed, the area of the privy was cemented over with the new structure. Now, after decades, the Leary Press is to be demolished. This affords a prime opportunity – perhaps the last opportunity – to resolve the question once and for all: “Did Lizzie Borden drop the murder weapon in the barn privy?” If a hatchet head is found and it dates to the period of 1892 (and we know it was a NEW hatchet from The Knowlton Papers), then one can safely assume Lizzie did, indeed, murder her father and stepmother and dropped the hatchet into that muck and guck at the bottom of the sink hole of the barn privy, knowing no one would ever dig into it. If this is the case, no wonder our enigmatic Miss Lizzie expressed little anxiety about the searches throughout the house and “inside” the barn.
If Lizzie disposed of the murder weapon in such a manner, why would she place herself out in the yard and in the barn? Why not simply say she was “down cellar” looking for something or in the privy there? She could not possibly say that. She had been seen coming back from the barn moments before giving the alarm: “Bridget come down! Someone’s killed father!” She had been seen by Hyman Lubinsky and she knew she had been seen. She could not lie. That was too easy a lie to get caught in. Better to admit she was outside, not just in the barn, but up in the loft – up in the loft for 20 minutes – eating pears – adjusting a curtain. Anything but in the privy, which would have had an innocent use unless already visited with a guilty purpose.
The first words out of a guilty person’s mouth immediately after completing a crime are often telling towards their guilt. Lizzie’s first response to the question: “Miss Lizzie, where was you?” (Bridget) was: “I was out in the yard and heard a distressing noise and rushed in and the screen door was wide open.” She had to be out in the yard. She had been seen. And what about the “distressing noise?” Did the dropping of the hatchet make a clanging noise as it bumped against the splash board? Distressing indeed. But Lizzie doesn’t place herself inside the barn until she realizes if she had been in the yard for more than a few minutes she surely would have seen the fleeing assailant. And so she begins weaving that tangled web of being IN the barn, UP in the loft of the barn. (Fish hooks, and sinkers and pears! Oh my!)
If Lizzie did drop the murder weapon down the privy, why didn’t the police find it? Let us address just what is on record regarding the search for the missing weapon as it pertains to the possibility of being in the privy.
I performed “word searches” on each of the primary documents and several books on the Borden case, as follows:
“privy”, “privvy”, “privie”, “privvie”, “barn”, and “vault”
The word “privy” or any variation of the word, appears only rarely in these documents, and only in the context that it “was searched”, period. No details as to how thoroughly it was searched, only “searched”. Over the years, the phrase “the privy was searched” has come to be accepted on face value that it was searched and no weapon was found because no weapon was there because it was searched.
Let us consider for a moment that several police officers searched the dress closet on the second floor of the Borden house and examined all her dresses “one by one” per testimony. Yet, they found no “paint stained dress” – a dress which was burned the Sunday following the murders. Yet, that “closet was searched.” Yes, “the privy was searched” – and no weapon was found.
Amazingly, there is virtually little to no use of the word “privy” in any of these sources. References to searches in the barn most always dealt with “up in the loft” and only skirted reference to the privy itself. There was extensive testimony about searching the barn loft for footprints (Medley’s “cake walk”), turning over the hay, and people in and out of the barn before and after the police entered, 
Lizzie coming from the barn, the location of woodpiles and boxes and workbenches. In fact, in hunting for statements specific to searches of the privy itself, the privy seemed almost an invisible component of the barn. Dismissive. Of lesser importance. And yet, and yet WHAT BETTER PLACE TO DITCH A HATCHET?!
The following references are in sequence as to proceedings or publication:
PRIMARY SOURCE DOCUMENTS
WITNESS STATEMENTS
August 8, 1892 – Officer D. Desmond
“Mr. Jennings was there at, the time. Emma spoke about a “lumber pile in the yard”, and thought it would be a good place to search. Mr. Bryant, and myself went into the cellar; and it was thoroughly searched by Edson, Conners, Quigley and Desmond. From there, we went and searched be barn, lumber pile, yard, privy vault and well, also John Crowe’s yard which is on south side of Borden house. The search I am satisfied was a good one; but we failed to find anything.”
LIZZIE’S INQUEST TESTIMONY
Lizzie’s inquest testimony: “privy” or any variation not used.
CORONER’S INQUEST
– “privy” or any variation is not mentioned in any testimony.
“barn” = Churchill – in context of what Lizzie told her she was doing in the barn.
PRELIMINARY HEARING
Pg 33 Bridget testimony
“Q. That privy out behind the barn, was that used by any member of the family, was that in use?
A. Mr. Borden used it.
Q. Did anybody else besides him?
A. Mrs. Borden sometimes.
Q. Did you ever know the girls to use it?
A. No Sir.”
Pg 247 Morse testimony:
Q. Is there a privy vault here at the east end of the barn?
A. Yes sir.
Q. At the south east end of the barn?
A. Yes sir.
Pg 350 Officer Michael Mullaly testimony
A. No. I believe I went from there, and went out and searched the barn and the yard.
Q. The whole barn?
A. That is, I searched downstairs and up.
Q. In the barn?
A. Yes.
Q. With the same object in view, for the man or the weapon?
A. The same object in view.
Q. Did you disturb the pile of boards, or did anybody?
A. I do not know as I disturbed anything.
Pg 360 – Mullaly:
Q. You searched the cellar again, and the barn?
A. I did not.
Q. It was searched, was not it?
A. Not at that time.
Q. Did you search the vault, and everything else?
A. I searched it on the first day.
Q. You went through such things as band boxes and barrels and all those things on this Saturday search, and bundles, undid bundles?
A. We went through everything.
Q. Things done up in bundles, you went through those, and untied them?
A. Yes sir, furs and capes &c.
Pg 416 Marshall Hilliard
A. Well, I presume part of it; the other part is Dr. Kelley’s I presume. From there we went, or I went to the well, or what was the well, but it has been filled up. From there I went to the rear end of the barn, and looked into a vault that was there. From that I went into the barn, up where they were overhauling the hay. I looked around there, and came down stairs, and helped in the search of the carriage house and the carriages and barrels.
Q. That is in the lower part of the barn?
A. Yes Sir, on the west end.
(Mr. Knowlton) Not a separate building?
(Mr. Jennings) No.
A. It is that part of the barn where the carriages are, and it is on the west end of the barn, down stairs. We searched in the stalls that are on the north of the barn, and also under the stairway that is there; in fact, all that was down stairs.
Q. You made a thorough search of the whole premises?
A. Yes Sir. When we got through there, I came up and told the officers that—- Well, I sent them to search the other yards around.
SUPERIOR COURT TRIAL TRANSCRIPT
Contains more testimony concerning those being “up in the barn” (the barn loft) rather than the yard level of the barn where the privies were.
Pg21 (Vol I) Bridget’s testimony:
“Q. You do not mean the front door, the carriage door?
A. No, sir.
Q. But the door which is just this side of the privy door?
A. Yes, sir. (Photograph shown witness). Yes, sir, the door where the water is,—the water inside the door.
SUPERIOR COURT TRIAL TRANSCRIPT
Pg1391 (Vol. II) Walter Stevens testimony:
“A. I stepped down from the fence and walked up to the barn.
Q. Didn’t go into the barn?
A. Not at that time.
Q. What were you doing there?
A. Well, we looked into the filled-in well. We looked there.
Q. That is in front of the barn?
A. In front of the barn.
Q. Did you also look in the vault behind the barn?
A. Looked into it.
Q. Before you came to the barn?
A. Yes.”
BOOKS – IN ORDER OF PUBLICATION
FALL RIVER TRAGEDY – EDWIN PORTER (1893)
(search “barn”) “privy” or any variation not used in entire book.
Pg12:
“All through that eventful day the police searched the house, cellar, yard and barn but found nothing to confirm any suspicions which they might have entertained as to who was guilty of the crimes.”
Pg13:
“From cellar to attic the police and physicians delved into every nook and corner; every particle of hay in the barn loft and every blade of grass in the yard was turned over; and when the day was done the harvest had been nothing, except the discovery of the double murder of a peaceful old man and his harmless wife, struck down in their home like an ox in the stall.”
TRIAL OF LIZZIE BORDEN – EDMUND PEARSON (1937)
The word “privy” or any derivation thereof is not used throughout the entire book. The word “vault” is used only in reference to the bodies of Andrew and Abby being placed in a receiving “vault” at Oak Grove Cemetery.
THE UNTOLD STORY – EDWARD RADIN (1961)
Same as above.
LIZZIE BORDEN – A PRIVATE DISGRACE – VICTORIA LINCOLN (1967)
Pg 34
“But the house had a back lot deep enough to accommodate to the left a small stable—
“the barn,” as the Bordens called it—and a disused privy tucked behind it and the back fence, and to the right a woodpile, a grape arbor, and two or three pear trees. “
(Word “vault” used in context with Oak Grove Cemetery).
GOODBYE LIZZIE BORDEN – JUDGE ROBERT SULLIVAN (1974)
Pg 61
“Pearson was a friend of Knowlton’s son and thus became privy to some of the District Attorney’s correspondence years after the trial had ended.”
(No other mention of “privy” or variations thereof; reference to vault w/Oak Grove).
Faye Musselman
January 26, 2005
Update: May. 2005
The current owners/operators of the Lizzie Borden B&B did not engage any professional assistance to determine if there was a metal hatchet head (or any metal) in the “vault” area when demolition of the abutting structure (formerly the” barn”) was bulldozed down. Some pottery, china, bottles, a porcelain doll, etc. were found by the manager through cursory digging. It is quite possible any evidence of a hatchet having been discarded in the privy vault was obliterated or scooped up by the bulldozer. Thus, speculation as to Lizzie disposing of the murder weapon in this manner will forever remain an unsolved mystery.
Note: March 10, 2008
Three years later I am still not 100% convinced the hatchet was dropped in the privy. Neither am I 100% convinced the actual murder weapon was that which was found on Crowe’s barn roof just prior to the start of the Trial in 1893. In addition, I continue to ponder the possibility the hatchet is still INSIDE THE HOUSE – MOST LIKELY HIDDEN INSIDE THE CELLAR OR CELLAR WALLS. The cellar would seem an obvious place for Lizzie to say she was when the murder of her father took place and yet it is the one place she removes herself furthest from. But it is still her calm demeanor in her replies regarding searches that lead me to think she had no worry of them finding the murder weapon in that muck and guck WHICH WAS NEVER THOROUGHLY SEARCHED OR DRAINED!!!
Lizzie Borden Collectibles for Sale
March 12, 2008
I’ve just put up some of my Lizzie Borden stuff on the “Collectibles for Sale” page. Where there are multiple copies and some get sold, I’ll indicate in red as SOLD. I’ll be adding more items every few days – different stuff. I’ve got a shed full of this and after 40 years I’m only keeping what’s near and dear.
Meanwhile – on the Fall River front: The Central Congregational Church’s steeple (okay, okay, the Culinary Institute) will get a “wrap-around” to secure it from losing more bricks and preventing passer-bys from possible injuries. Chef/Owner George Kourosos will be footing the bill, as well as covering the added police cost for blocking the sidewalk. Expensive as that is, it is nothing to what a citizen could sue the city AND the Culinary Insitute for. Can’t wait to see what the wrap-around will look like. Hope it isn’t some “tattered fabric”. 
Read about it here.
The Rarity of Porter’s The Fall River Tragedy
March 2, 2008
I’m re-posting this blog entry from September 2007 because this evening I noted an eBay seller has an original Porter listed for a “Buy it Now” price of $6,000! (Note: Seller dropped price to $3,000 on March 3rd) Only an idiot would pay that much given that antiquarian booksellers have a few available right now for less than a thousand bucks. An easy Google search will prove this out.
Check out the eBay Seller’s listing here.
More interesting to me, however, is that the Seller did a literal cut and paste from my words below. The whole point of my post is that the book is NOT AS RARE as it has been professed to be and thus, this may very well be the reason the eBay Seller did not cite my blog or provide the URL to this particular entry. Otherwise, the potential bidder/buyer would be well – less inclined to pay that much. “BUYER BEWARE!”. As a matter of fact, I’m going to offer up one of my four original Porters in my “Collectibles for Sale” page….so just be patient. 
The more important books on the Borden case reveal an evolution of author-to-author citations as to the rarity of Edwin H. Porter’s book (the first edition), The Fall River Tragedy, Press of J. D. Munroe, 1893. It appears the legend begins in 1967 with Victoria Lincoln because even in his 1937 Trial Essay, Edmund Pearson’s “bible”, there is no mention. Since Pearson believed in Lizzie’s guilt I’d think he would have mentioned it. Edward D. Radin – who proposed that Bridget did it – made a point of NOT mentioning it.
William Masterton’s Lizzie Didn’t Do It, and Muriel Arnold’s Hands of Time had no reference to the rarity of Porter’s book. Nor did Angela Carter. (BTW, I think Muriel’s Ward 4 and Neighborhood sketches in the front of her book are far better and more encompassing than others that have been published). There are scads of reference to the “rarity”, i.e., “Lizzie bought out….” in numerous compendium books – too many to cite here. I didn’t bother with the fictional accounts of the Borden case (Hunter, Engstrom, Satterthwait) because golly gee, who the hell cares. So here are the more obvious citations to be found:
1967 – Private Disgrace – Victoria Lincoln p27 – “…bought off the printer had the books destroyed”
1967 – Private Disgrace – Lincoln p304 -”The town was further irked when Lizzie bought up The Fall River Tragedy and nobody had a chance to read it. Everyone wanted to. As I told you at the start of our story, I had to wait for the pleasure forty years before I found the first copy that I had ever seen, in the Library of Congress.”
1968 – Untold Story – Edward Radin p16 -The Fall River Tragedy, by Edwin H. Porter, a Fall River police reporter, who stoutly defended Fall River police for arresting Lizzie Borden. This book, published in Fall River, had a limited sale and circulation. “
1974 – Goodbye Lizzie Borden – Sullivan p142 -”…virtually all copies were purchased and destroyed by Lizzie.”
1984 – Lizzie – Frank Spiering p36 – His footnote:”The Fall River Tragedy by Edwin H. Porter, printed privately in 1893, was the first book published about the murders. Only four copies are known to exist. A copy which was originally in the Library of Congress has vanished, one is kept at the State House in Boston, one is in the archives of the Fall River Historical Society and one is in my possession. Lizzie bought off the printer and had all the other copies destroyed before they reached the bookshops.”
1991 – Legend of Lizzie Borden – Arnold Brown p89-90 -”It is not known how many copies of The Fall River Tragedy were printed, but it had to be several hundred if not several thousand. Fifty years ago only two copies were known to exist, and one other copy was rumored. Mrs. Brigham at the Fall River Historical Society has reported that four copies are now held by the society, and she knows of one other held privately. Even the copy that should be held by the Library of Congress is missing. The overwhelming majority of the press run simply disappeared the day it was published. Miss Lizzie, the legend says, acting on the advice of Andrew Jennings, bought up and destroyed every copy she could. If Lizzie did not do that, someone did.”
1992 – Forty Whacks – David Kent xiv -”Knowledge of what Porter had done was unwittingly obscured when Lizzie, learning of the publication, was rumored to have bought up all but about 25 subscription copies and had them destroyed. Thus, only a few ever saw what Porter had written and were unaware of his distortions. But scholars ferreted out the half-dozen copies held in public libraries and other institutions and these became the sourcebooks for all research. Fortunately for historians, Porter’s book was rescued from limbo in 1985 and reprinted by King Philip Publishing Company of Portland, Maine. “
At the 1992 Lizzie Borden Centennial Conference held at Bristol Community College in Fall River, Patterson Smith of New Jersey gave a presentation on this very topic. He stated that Porter’s book is not that “rare” after all, as many were sold on subscription – perhaps over 500. I, myself, have handled at least 20 of these first editions in the past 25 years and have 4 original Porters in my collection, but one of my collector associates actually has FIVE in his collection!
Of the four original Porters I have, one has hand-written notes from a minister who knew Lizzie and Emma and he wrote periodically about seeing them from time to time, i.e., at the Swansea farm with “the horses”, the rumors around town, when they parted, when Lizzie died, etc. His marginal notes and the two pages of typewritten notes inside the book, only enhance its value, IMHO. My fourth and most recent copy was purchased in Fall River just this past August from a private party to whom I was introduced.
In 1992, I took one of my Porters to the Conference and sold it for over $1,000 right there to an eager buyer, who I long have suspected was a shill for Patterson Smith because he was peeking around the corner of the building at the time. Too funny! Perhaps he “financed” the eager buyer?
In the last several years, I’ve noted at least 6 original Porter’s sold on eBay (not counting those I’ve sold on eBay myself). In addition, just this past year two of my close friends have obtained copies for less than $300 from booksellers, and another person I know traded several rare true crime books with a noted author for his copy of an original Porter.
Obviously, the dollar value of any book is only worth what a buyer is willing to pay. But as to the rarity of “an original Porter”, this long, literary legend of Lizzie (nice alliteration, eh?) is simply that – a legend.
“Perpetual Care” at Fall River’s Oak Grove Cemetery
March 1, 2008
Both Lizzie Borden and her sister Emma left monies for “perpetual care” of their father’s family plot in their Wills. In fact, is was the #1 item in Lizzie’s itemized bequests:
“1. To the City of Fall River the sum of five hundred dollars, the income derived there from to be used for the perpetual care of my father’s lot in the Oak Grove Cemetery in said Fall River.”
Emma Borden’s second bequest in her Will states:
“SECOND: I give and bequeath to the Treasurer of the City of Fall River, in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, the sum of One Thousand Dollars ($1,000), the same to be held by said City of Fall River, IN TRUST, the income thereof to be used and applied for the perpetual care and improvement of the family burial lot, and the monuments and stones thereon, in Oak Grove Cemetery, which was owned by my father, Andrew J. Borden, at the time of his death.”
Emma signed her Will on November 20, 1920 (and a Codicil to that Will on June 22, 1922). Lizzie signed her Will January 30, 1926.
Being curious of just what “perpetual care” meant in the 21st Century relative to the Borden plot, I contacted Tom Eaton, Director of Cemeteries with the Fall River Department of Recreational Facilities, Cemeteries and Trees.
Oak Grove Cemetery encompasses over 100 acres of land which was donated to the City of Fall River in the 1840’s. There are several cemeteries in Fall River, but only two are maintained by the City: Oak Grove and North Burial Ground on North Main Street. Many remains and tombstones were removed from the latter cemetery to Oak Grove in the past two centuries, including that of the tragic Sarah Cornell.
(Some other interesting and Borden case-related graves can be found at Find A Grave.)
Back to “perpetual care”:
Operations and Maintenance of Oak Grove Cemetery is primarily funded by “perpetual care” monies, although the City of Fall River does contribute some budgetary funding. “Perpetual care” is mandatory (in Lizzie’s day it was not) for anyone now buried in Oak Grove. For example, if a person purchased a two plot burial site, it would cost $1,000, of which $500 would go into the perpetual care fund. This is a pooled fund from all perpetual care revenue, so the $500 assessment is not exclusive or designated for a specific plot, but rather placed in the fund for general use of operations and maintenance of the entire Cemetery.
The O&M costs primarily covered by “perpetual care” monies include salaries and administrative overhead as well as for weeding and other maintenance activities on the burial plot itself. This includes cemetery maintenance needs such as care of the roads, pathways, fencing, locks, utility costs for the office, the cutting and caring of trees, painting, mowing, debris clean up, etc.
As would be expected, time, nature and vandalism have taken a toll on Oak Grove. The perpetual care fund is insufficient to do more than minimal maintenance, let alone planting of new and replacement trees. The “Friends of Oak Grove Cemetery” is an excellent blog site with beautiful photos of Oak Grove and provides information on how locals and others can help with maintenance and tree planting. (Mary Ann Wordell, president of the Fall River Street Tree Planting Program and a resident of the Highlands donated a tree to be planted in Oak Grove in the spring in memory of her family.)
The $500 and $1,000 that Lizzie and Emma set forth in their Wills for perpetual care has long been depleted according to Tom Eaton. Any maintenance done to the Andrew Borden plot now is from the pooled fund.
In a way, the phrase “Perpetual care” for grave sites and family plots spread over 100 acres seems an oxymoron given the current funding constraints. But in Lizzie & Emma’s time maybe people took it literally – thinking whatever they bequeathed guaranteed maintenance into perpetuity.
The Andrew Jackson Borden family plot is the most visited and photographed of all the grave sites in the Cemetery. It is fortunate that occasionally a visitor will trim the grass around the headstones, clean off the stones, weed the walkways and so forth. While there may be a shortage of “perpetual care” funds for a higher standard of maintenance throughout the Cemetery, continuation of “perpetual visitors” to the Borden family historic grave site seems guaranteed ….and here it comes…..you guessed it…..into perpetuity.
Here is a map of the layout of Oak Grove Cemetery.
