Preliminary Hearing FREE + Rebello & Knowlton Papers!!

UPDATE:

CONGRATULATIONS TO LINDA ROSE OF BUENA PARK, CA. WHO PURCHASED BOTH BOOKS FOR A TOTAL OF $500 – AT $250 EACH SHE GOT A BARGAIN!

STAY TUNED – MORE COMING!

Have you been looking for a free copy of the Preliminary Hearing in the Lizzie Borden case?  Have you been wanting affordable copies of Len Rebello’s Lizzie Borden Past & Present? And have you been on the hunt for the Fall River Historical Society’s The Knowlton Papers? Well, you’ve landed in the right place.

Central Police Station, where the Preliminary Hearing was held.

First, here’s another free and easy access to reading the entire transcript of the Preliminary Hearing.  Just click:

PRELIMINARY HEARING

EMAIL ME FOR PASSWORD.

I also have it as a separate page on this blog as you can see at the top of this page, but here you don’t have to do a cut and paste into WORD for printing.  You can print directly from this Writeboard format.  You can also export it to your hard drive!  How cool is that?!

It is, after all, the Season of Giving.

I’ll be giving lots more real soon as I’m about to trim down more of my Lizzie Collectibles at bargain basement prices.

Are you looking for these?

Well, I’ve got several of each and the prices will be the best you can get.    I’ll be posting more info about them along with lots of other collectibles soon, but if you can’t wait and want to be assured you get one (or both), email me at phaye@npgcable.com and make an offer.  (Some of the Rebello’s are autographed by the author and come with mylar covers.  All have the dust jackets.)

LIZZIE’S ARREST RECORD BOOK

Fall River Police Chief John M. Souza

On the wall of the Administrative offices at the Fall River Police Department are these photographs of the past City Marshal’s and Police Chiefs.

• Rufus B Hillard – City Marshal – 1886-1909 (top left)
  

• John Fleet – City Marshal – 1909-1915 (bottom left)
  

• (Change from City Marshal to Chief of Police)

• William Medley – Chief of Police – 1915-1917 (center)
  

• Martin Feeney – Chief of Police – 1917-1931 (top right)
  

• Abel Violette – Chief of Police – 1931-1946 (bottom right)
  source: http://www.frpd.org/history.htm

Four of the five were involved in the Lizzie Borden case and had been in her house. Lizzie damn near outlived them all.

On November 14, 2000, through the courtesy of then Lt. Charles Cullen of the Fall River Police Department, I was allowed access to the police records books of the mid 1880’s through the early 1900’s. They were under the control and possession of Administration Lt. (now Deputy Chief) Cathleen Moniz.

When I arrived she had them laid out on her desk along with “all the remaining documents we have on the Lizzie Borden case”, which was miniscule at best. She was kind enough to let me handle, research and photograph these important ledger books. Lt. Cullen had also arranged for me a tour of the new police facilities (completed in March of 1997) which included their huge evidence room. High on a shelf was the camera long thought to have been “the” camera which photographer James Walsh took of Andrew and Abby – the crime scene photos – both just prior to and after the initial autopsies done at 92 Second Street around 4:00 pm, August 4, 1892. As has been learned, while the camera in possession of the FRPD is indeed a police photographer’s camera very similar to that one used on August 4th, it is not the camera, but one donated by a family member of a deceased police photographer.

In March of 2007, I contacted Deputy Chief Moniz once again and asked if she could arrange for the Arrest Record Book be brought out again so as to show to my friend, Shelley Dziedzic. Again, Deputy Chief Moniz had them laid out and allowed us to take pictures. She even gratiously took a photo of Shelley and me with the book.

Unexpectedly, having heard of our visit and plans to do a Lizzie Borden Conference, Police Chief John M. Souza, Fall River Police Chief since 2000, came into the room and spent an hour discussing the Borden case with us as well as other high profile murder cases. We delighted in his conversation regarding police forensic investigations as contrasted in the Borden case of 1892, to modern police forensic techniques used today. He instructed Deputy Chief Moniz to take us down to the “vault” where “historical” police records are stored. (For security reasons, I’ll refrain from describing the room or it’s safeguards.) While there it was interesting to learn that most all of the historic police files were lost in flood damage and, where the Borden case is concerned, also due to pilferage decades ago. Now the Department has rigid policies and procedures to protect and preserve case documents.

Lizzie’s arrest entry

Subsequent to the Preliminary Hearing of probable guilt, the entry of “Prob.” was handwritten over the standard “Guilty” column.

Jose Corriero murdered Bertha Manchester in Fall River with an axe on May 30, 1893. The papers reported this other hatchet murder the following day prior to the Borden Trial jury being sequestered. On June 3rd, 19 year old Jose was arrested and booked. (Note different spellings of his name. I took note of the fact he was born on January 8th, same as me.) The year of his birth is recorded as 1874, which would make him 19 on June 3, 1893, but the ledger shows age 18.

That a suspect was in custody was not known to the jury as they had been sequestered by the time it was reported in the papers, which they were not allowed to read. Thus, in the minds of these mostly farmer jurors, a hatchet yielding maniac was still on the loose and could have been – by golly – the same one that murdered old Andrew and Abby.

Tags: chief john souza, fall river police department

Lizzie Borden Preliminary Hearing – FREE

UPDATE (August 4, 2009)

“Stop and go no further!” cried the spinster.

“But I am for Truth, Justice & the American way!” bellowed the blogger. (LMAO)

**************************

By clicking the “Preliminary Hearing” page above, you can read the entire transcript of this proceeding in the Lizzie Borden case, absolutely FREE. You can also cut and paste the entire text into Word and save it to your hard drive for later printing if you wish.

The Preliminary Hearing in the Lizzie Borden case was held August 25, 1892 through September 1, 1892.  It was near enough to the murders that memories were sharper than when shared by the same witnesses at the Trial ten months later.

(Click on all images for larger view)

The first hard copy availability of this primary source document was made over 15 years ago through the Fall River Historical Society.  They received Defense Attorney Andrew Jenning’s copy, with his handwritten notes, and sold copies through their gift shop

At the time of the Hearing, newspapers reported on the daily testimony but it was the New Bedford Evening Standard that printed all of the Preliminary Hearing after the Trial -  including Lizzie’s Inquest testimony – which had been read into the record.

The book above contains the full transcript and although it is in very small print, it has wonderful illustrations.

I made copies of the original source document from the FRHS and bound them as shown in the first image above and sold them on eBay over a decade ago.  In 2000, I began transcribing the document in Word format and put them on CD’s as a Research and Reference source into this case.

The above image gives a description of the content of those CD’s, inclusive of my own transcription of the Preliminary Hearing.

I sold the CD’s for many years in different formats beginning in 2001.

Often times I sold the CD with other Lizzie collectibles.

The CD, with my own Word transcription has been copyrighted for years.

I also made a hard copy of my transcribed document from 2001 as seen above and this, as well as the CD’s have been sold or given away for years, including sold at the Lizzie Borden Bed & Breakfast in Fall River, MA.

Harry Widdows, Stefani Koorey and Kat Koorey edited their own version of a transcribed Preliminary Hearing and sell it through LuLu Press and the FRHS for around $40!

Now you can read this most interesting document absolutely FREE, cut and paste the text into MS Word and have it on your hard drive.  You can even do word searches.

Again, just click on the “Preliminary Hearing” page to this blog at the top and Enjoy!

William H. Moody

The prosecution team in the matter of the Commonwealth vs. Lizzie Andrew Borden included the formidable William Henry Moody, whose stellar career surpassed all others associated with the case.  An extraordinarily handsome man, in my opinion, he remained a life-long bachelor.

If Lizzie continued her reading of Harper’s Weekly, she may have seen the December 29, 1906 issue below and its cartoon cover story on one of the men who played a part in a “most interesting occasion.”  Most all of the text which follows comes from that article.

William Henry Moody was born on December 23, 1853, in Newbury, Massachusetts, the son of farmers. He graduated from Phillips Andover Academy in 1872 and Harvard in 1876, leaving Harvard Law School after four months to read law under Richard Henry Dana. After admission to the state bar in 1878, Moody practiced law in Haverhill, Massachusetts, where he was elected city solicitor (1888-1889). In 1890, he was named the U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Massachusetts.

In 1895, he was elected as a Republican to fill a vacant seat in Congress, and subsequently elected three more times. He impressed his congressional colleagues with his command of legislative details and debating skills, and served on the powerful House Appropriations Committee.

Theodore Roosevelt first met Moody in 1895 and quickly came to admire a man with a similar physical build, athletic interests, and a progressive Republican perspective. In 1902, Roosevelt appointed Moody as secretary of the navy.

Moody served in that capacity for two years, working to expand and improve the U.S. naval fleet, and reform the navy’s organization.

In June 1904, the president named him as the U.S. Attorney General. In his new position, Moody became a key advisor to the president and played a leading role in the prosecution of the administration’s antitrust lawsuits, successfully arguing Swift and Company v. United States (1905) before the U.S. Supreme Court. He agreed with Roosevelt’s distinction between “good” and “bad” trusts.

The Justice Department under Moody negotiated agreements with large business corporations that it deemed were working in the public interest, such as International Harvester and U.S. Steel, but prosecuted Standard Oil because its economic power and business activities were considered contrary to the public interest. As attorney general, Moody took a case concerning peonage of blacks to the Supreme Court, and ordered contempt proceedings against a sheriff who allowed a black rape suspect to be lynched.

Harper’s Weekly was concerned about the centralization of governmental power during the administration of Republican Theodore Roosevelt (1901-1909), and in December 1906 criticized an address in which Secretary of State Elihu Root called for federal intervention in situations where the states failed to act. Root’s speech, which the newspaper assumed was actually written by President Roosevelt, is excerpted in the caption of the featured cartoon. The cartoon warns that William Moody, whom the president had recently named to the U.S. Supreme Court, will be a judicial tool by which Roosevelt can expand federal powers at the expense of state control through new “constructions of the Constitution.” On the right, Secretary of War William Howard Taft sits studying the “Simplified Constitution” while waiting his turn for the next appointment to the Supreme Court.

When Justice Henry Brown resigned from the U.S. Supreme Court in 1906, President Roosevelt tried unsuccessfully to convince Taft to take the position and then considered appointing a Southern Democrat. Finally, on December 12, 1906, the president announced the selection of Moody, emphasizing the attorney general’s nationalist philosophy by describing him as a follower of Alexander Hamilton and John Marshall, not states’ rights advocates Thomas Jefferson and John C. Calhoun. The Senate approved the nomination on December 17.

During Moody’s brief tenure on the Supreme Court, he wrote 67 opinions, including 5 dissents. His most famous dissent came in the Employers’ Liability Cases (1908) in which his minority opinion upheld the constitutionality of a congressional statute protecting employees involved in interstate commerce. The constitutional power to regulate interstate commerce, he argued, included the authority to legislate labor-management relations. Despite his general support of enhanced federal powers, Moody’s most important majority opinion (later overturned) ruled that the federal constitutional provision in the Fifth Amendment against self-incrimination did not apply in state courts (Twining v. State of New Jersey, 1908). Moody’s judicial career was cut short when he developed debilitating rheumatism in early 1909 and was increasingly forced to neglect his judicial responsibilities. In 1910, Congress passed legislation that permitted Moody to qualify for federal retirement benefits, and he retired from the Supreme Court.

A saddened President Roosevelt remarked, “there is not a public servant, at this particular time, that the public could so ill afford to lose.” Eventually incapable of moving his arms and legs, Moody lived seven more years with the painful disease, cared for by his sister until his death on July 2, 1917.

The Fall River Tragedy – Rare Book FREE Online

The first book to be published on the Lizzie Borden case was right after her Trial in 1893 by Edwin Porter, a reporter for the Fall River Globe and a chum of some of the police officers who provided some inside information.

The first edition, the original, is not easily found and when it does appear, such as on eBay, usually sells for $300 or more.  Some antique book dealers list it as high as $2,000.  The book itself is really not all that rare.  I addressed this issue in detail in a previous blog which can be found by clicking HERE.

Lizzie’s lawyer, Andrew Jennings, on behalf of the Borden sisters and John Morse,  threatened Porter and the publisher with legal action if any pictures of “the family” appeared.  Well, pictures of the “dead family” appeared and no suit followed.

When the book was first published, it was sold on subscription, and one of the “Lizzie Legends” is that Lizzie bought out the printer and had the copies burned.  Not true.  A goodly number were purchased – and to some Fall River notables at that. The one found AT THIS SITE was owned by Charlotte Brayton and she donated it to the Harvard Library.   The Braytons were one of the prominent founding families of Fall River.

By clicking to advance the pages , you will immediately see the handwritten inscription on the inside cover:  “Israel Brayton”.  This particular Israel Brayton* was born in 1874 and died in 1961.  He married Ethel Moison Chace (1880-1960), and they had three children, including Charlotte Brayton (1913 to 1994).  Charlotte never married.  For whatever reasons, Charlotte preferred to donate her father’s copy of The Fall River Tragedy to Harvard rather than the Fall River Historical Society.  Lucky thing for us she did.

The book is rich in photos of key players not found in other books and includes the old “Ferry Street” homestead, the house Andrew deeded to the girls over the Whitehead fiasco.  Well, that house was practically a prototype of the home he purchased in 1872 at 92 Second Street.  Greek revival, two-family home.  Andrew was worth a small fortune by 1872 but he didn’t exactly move “up”.   Anyway, here’s a picture of both houses:

Virtually, the same house.  Two stories and an attic built for 2 families with identical floor plans on the first and second floors.   Lizzie was 12 when they moved and she could not have been too impressed.  The only difference was after a short while they had “the whole house”.  So that was different.

Thanks to the Harvard Library, and thanks to Charlotte Brayton, you can now READ, AND PRINT OUT THE ENTIRE BOOK FOR FREE – AND AS IT WAS ORIGINALLY PUBLISHED.   NO WORD DOCUMENT HERE.  HERE YOU CAN ENJOY IT JUST AS IT WAS LAID OUT – NOT RETYPED IN WORD FORMAT AND UPLOADED TO A FORUM SITE WITHOUT ANY IMAGES.  HERE YOU GET THE REAL DEAL.   ENJOY!  IT’S FREE!

CLICK HERE —>  FALL RIVER TRAGEDY

*Source: The Braytons of Somerset and Fall River by Roswell Brayton, page 34. (Note: Charlotte is pictured with several generations of Braytons in this book; also pictured are her father and mother.)

The Skulls of Andrew & Abby Borden

Dr. William Andrew Dolan

The autopsies of Lizzie Borden’s father and stepmother were conducted one week after the murders – August 11, 1892, in the “ladies waiting room” at Oak Grove Cemetery.  It is the structure to the left in this picture postcard below.

Here is a more contemporary view:The little building is now used to house gardening tools and supplies and also serves as a break room for the grounds-keepers.

Upon the instruction of District Attorney Hosea Knowlton, the heads of Andrew and Abby were severed and taken home by Dr. Dolan.    They were unceremoniously boiled of their flesh on his kitchen stove (much to the fright of his two young sons), and maintained in his home until presented in court at the Preliminary Hearing.   The sisters were not informed, nor the media – one of the better kept secrets of the prosecution’s case. 

Below is the link to the letter from Dr. Dolan’s grandson, Donald Dolan, to Robert Flynn dated March 6, 1992.   (Don Dolan was a teacher, and a Presenter at the 1992 Lizzie Borden Centennial.  He passed away May 15, 2002 and is buried at Rutland Town Cemetery in Mass.  His widow, Joyce, still resides in the same home they shared for 50 years).

boilheads4

A thorough reading of the actual typed autopsy reports, including hand written notes, is available from the images below.

(Right click on the text below for larger view).

The Preliminary Hearing commenced on August 25, 1892 and once the revelation of the heads being severed hit the papers, it brought forth the indignation and revulsion of some readers.   As an example, also in my collection is this letter from one John E. Gray written to Dr. Dolan, referring to him as a “vile wretch”.  First is an image of the actual letter and then a translation done by his grandson, Don, to Bob Flynn:  brutal

It wasn’t until after the Trial in July of 1893, when Hosea Knowlton wrote to Dr. Dolan stating that Lizzie and Emma’s legal counsel, Andrew Jennings, wanted the skulls returned.   Click to see returnskulls.

Another letter in this collection remembers this occurrence as conveyed by Dolan’s grandson to Bob Flynn.   He also mentions visiting his Aunt Ellen who lives near Oak Grove Cemetery.      Porter-Skulls

The skulls were subsequently buried in boxes about 3 feet below ground.  Placement was a “guestimate”.

Note1:  Robert Flynn is a publisher, author and former bookseller.

Note 2:  Joyce Dolan told me Don Dolan remembered his father (Dr. Dolan’s son)  telling him of seeing Abby’s hair switch in the attic of their home where other “evidence” was kept.

Note 3:  Dr. William A. Dolan had 4 children; 2 sons (Tom and William A. Dolan, Jr. – Don’s father) and 2 daughters (Ellen, called “Nellie” and Mary – both were spinster school teachers in Fall River).

Helen Leighton and Her Sister, Mary

In her Will, Lizzie Borden left much of her estate to her cousin, Grace Hartley Howe and her closest friend, Helen Leighton. But there are 21 other specifically named individuals to whom she left other real estate, personal property, jewelery, and/or money.  It’s always a rewarding challenge to find out more about who the lesser known recipients were.

Xerox copy of Lizzie Borden’s actual Will (Right click for larger image)

Helen Leighton was born 16 Jun 1866 in Columbia (near Millbridge), ME.

Helen’s parents were John Calvin Leighton and Susanna T. Jacobs who were married on March 10, 1865 in Milbridge, ME. (about 10 miles from Columbia). Her father went by his middle name, “Calvin”.   (Susanna may also have been known as Lucy Therese Jacobs but she was named Susanna on their marriage license.)

John Calvin Leighton was born at Columbia, ME, about 10 miles from Milbridge.  At age 94, his father Harrison Thatcher was interviewed by the Boston Sunday Globe 8 Dec 1895 concerning his recollections of day-to-day life in the past.

When Helen was  5 years old, her mother, Susanna, died at age 32 in Portland, ME. Three years later, Helen’s father married Hannah D. Robbins at Portland, ME on 8 July 8, 1874.  So, Helen also had a stepmother by the time she was 9 years old.  Then, two years after this second marriage when Helen was a month shy of her 11^th birthday, her father and stepmother had a little girl, Mary Woodbury Leighton, born May 14, 1876.  From all accounts it appears Helen and her younger sister were close and remained close for most of their lives.

In May of 1893, at the time Lizzie Borden was languishing in the Taunton jail awaiting her role in the Trial of the Century, Helen, about to turn 27 years old, was just graduating from the Fall River Nursing Training School. And on Sept 9, 1904, Helen’s stepsister, Mary W. Leighton married Henry L. Orters.

Thus, she became Mary Orters. For a few years their household included Helen.

As close as Lizzie Borden and Helen Leighton were, Lizzie undoubtedly met Helen’s younger sister and her husband Henry.  She must have been fond of both of them, or at least Mary (perhaps being told by Helen:  “Be good to her, she’s rich!”) endeared herself to Lizzie, because this Mary – Helen Leighton’s sister, is the subject of bequest #12 in Lizzie’s Will:

12. To Mrs. Mary L. Orters of Sharon, Massachusetts, the sum of five thousand dollars; if she shall not be living at my decease I give the same to her husband, Henry L. Orters.

Now, besides this stepsister thing, Helen can trace her ancestors to Thomas Leighton born about 1604 and died at Dover, NH 22 Jan 1672.  Thomas was among the planters of Dover (then known as Northam) with significant land holdings in the area.  A monument was erected to him along the west side of Back River Road in Dover. So Helen’s ancestor, Samuel Leighton, was the pioneer founder of Columbia, ME.  In 1763, and was active during the Revolutionary War defending the coast against the British.

Gee, fellow historians, is this ringing any bells about Lizzie Borden’s ancestors?   Can one imagine Lizzie and Helen conversing of what they had in common beyond the love of animals?  For example, much like Lizzie, I’m sure Helen was very much aware of her own roots.  Perhaps SHE had her own sense of entitlement.

Helen certainly came out ahead financially from being a nursing companion to one Borden (Eudora Borden Dean), being a close friend to another (Lizzie), and companion to a long time friend (Gertrude Baker).

It’s nice to know Helen – having prior experience – was savvy enough to see to it her stepsister got a “piece of Lizzie” (estate) as well. 

Sources:

• Leighton Genealogy, CD, 2001 pg. 501

• Genealogical Record 9 [1898]:86-9, 221-3, Autobiography of Levi Leighton [Portland, 1890], 9-11; and in

• Levi’s Centennial Historical Sketch of the Town of Columbia, 1796-1896 (Machias, 1896].

• Julia Cornman and Perley M., A Leighton Genealogy, Descendants of Thomas Leighton of Dover, NH, New England Historic Genealogical Society, 2 Vols., Boston, 1989.

• Leonard Rebello, Lizzie Borden Past & Present, Alzack press. 1999. pp330-332.

• Conversations/emails with Mary Leighton Proebstle.

CASE SETTLED! Lizzie Borden Bed & Breakfast/Museum vs. Salem’s “True Story” of Lizzie Borden Exhibit

For those who have been following the litigation between Donald Woods, co-owner of the Lizzie Borden Bed & Breakfast/Museum in Fall River, MA, and Leonard Pickel, operator of the recently opened “True Story of Lizzie Borden” exhibit in Salem, MA, – the case is expected to be settled out of court today. This result was what a few of us knew would be the probable outcome.

However, this AP first reporting was actually premature as the ink has not yet been applied to the Agreement papers as of noon Eastern time.  Mr. Pickel, no doubt in his excited relief, rushed to speak to the AP Reporter.  You can read the AP’s first and premature reporting of the settlement HERE.

At issue was Mr. Pickel’s use of the word “museum” in both his website URL and contact email address wherein Mr. Woods claimed copyright to the word when attached to “Lizzie Borden” as that was cause for confusion and adversarial to his (Woods) business.

For the next several days there will be the usual flurry of newspaper and t.v. reporting following up on the AP wire story.  All of which is good for both businesses.  We wish them well. 

And – unrelated to the case but for anyone interested, this next article associates Sarah Palin with Lizzie Borden.  Read it HERE.

Bathsheba Spooner, Hannah Piggen, and Rachel Wall

At the time of the Lizzie Borden case it was speculated that a jury would not convict because of the abysmal result of the last female hanged for murder – one Bathsheba Spooner. But Spooner was N0T the last female executed in Massachusetts prior to the Borden case.

While much is often made of Bathesheba Spooner, who was executed in 1778, as being the last female to have been executed in the State of Massachusetts prior to the Lizzie Borden case, the below list tells us something quite different. In fact, it shows the last two women executed by hanging were in 1789, both in Suffolk County, MA., and a mere 104 years before Lizzie was charged and tried for the murders of her father and stepmother.

Those not familiar with the Bathsheba Spooner case, here is a recap:

“In March 1778, Joshua Spooner, a wealthy gentleman farmer in Brookfield, was beaten to death and his body stuffed down a well. Four people were hanged for the crime: two British soldiers, a young Continental soldier, and Spooner’s wife, Bathsheba, who was charged with instigating the murder. She was thirty-two years old and five months pregnant when executed. Newspapers described the case as “the most extraordinary crime ever perpetrated in New England.”Bathsheba was the mother of three young children and in her own words felt “an utter aversion” for her husband, who was known to be an abusive drunk.

A year before the murder, she took in and nursed a sixteen-year-old Continental soldier who was returning from a year’s enlistment under George Washington. The two became lovers and conceived a child.

Divorces were all but impossible for women at that time and adulteresses were stripped to the waist and publicly whipped. Bathsheba’s pregnancy occasioned a series of desperate plots to murder her husband, finally brought to fruition with the aid of two British deserters from General Burgoyne’s defeated army.”

As the daughter of the state’s most prominent and despised Loyalist, Bathsheba bore the brunt of the political, cultural, and gender prejudices of her day. When she sought a stay of execution to deliver her baby, the Massachusetts Council rejected her petition, and she was promptly hanged before a crowd of 5,000 spectators.” -Murdered by His Wife, Deborah Navas, University of Mass. Press, 1999.

For additional information, see also Laura James True Crime Blog entry.

But in going over the list, I was struck by the name “Hannah Piggen”. (Some things you just can’t make up.) In 1785, Hannah Piggen, unknown age (#120 on list here) was executed in Middleton, MA. While little can be found about her, she has the distinction of being the last female to be executed for concealing birth. Not suprisingly, this “crime” was gender specific, i.e., any “concealment” by the biological father was not an issue. Had the unfortunate Hannah lived today she could have dropped the baby off at the nearest fire station and skulked away in the dark of night, to name but one option.

Also of interest to me was the other “Hannah” behind Ms. Piggen. This girl (nay, child) was a Native American girl, #121 on the list, and was only 12 years old. She was hanged for murder. Wonder who she murdered? Someone who raped her?

THE LAST WOMAN TO BE EXECUTED BY HANGING IN THE STATE OF MASS. PRIOR TO THE LIZZIE BORDEN CASE WAS NOT BATHSHEBA SPOONER – IT WAS RACHEL WALL. RACHEL WAS A NOTORIOUS WOMAN PIRATE AND CAN BE READ ABOUT HERE. SHE IS NO 127 ON THAT SAME LIST ABOVE.

I think we can put to rest the notion that Bathsheba Spooner was the last female to be put to death by hanging in the State of Mass. prior to the Lizzie Borden case, as is so frequently mentioned in books about Lizzie.

Arthur Sherman Phillips – Lizzie Didn’t Do It

Arthur Sherman Phillips wrote the impressive 3-Volume History of Fall River and was a junior attorney assisting on Lizzie’s defense team. The case haunted him all his life and he never gave up on the belief that she was innocent.

As late as June 3, 1939, he wrote to Homans Robinson (1894-1973) of the Robinson-Donovan law firm. He was the son of 3-times Governor George Robinson, Lizzie’s lead attorney at her Trial.   In his 3-page letter shown below, Phillips cites so many of the sources of speculative theories surrounding this case and ones that surface repeatedly in books, articles, and arguments towards her innocence.

It is not known if Homans Robinson, a 1916 graduate of Amherst college, replied to this letter. Surely if he had complied with Phillips request for a copy of the questions Attorney George Robinson presented to Lizzie, along with her answers, something would have been published in that regard by now.

Clearly, that document still resides in the private files on the case with this law firm, still in existence in Springfield, MA.

Note that in the second paragraph of the third page, Phillips tells of someone speaking to Uncle John Morse the morning of the murder as he was walking up Pleasant Street towards Flint Village. Morse did, in fact, visit his relatives at the Emerys on Weybosset Street in Flint Village, about a mile from the Borden home.

THE PRIVY IN THE BARN

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.

(Right click for better image)

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!!!

Andrew Borden and the Missing Prince Albert

Back from 4 days in San Francisco where I hooked up with the couple I met last year in Andover, MA at a Raytheon conference. They have a villa in Florence where I’ll be staying with my son, his fiance and my friend in Quincy, MA while they stay at my house in Payson enroute to the Grand Canyon. We gave each other info about our houses between sight-seeing jaunts and eating all kinds of shellfish. San Francisco was cold, cold, cold!! Busy with plans for the Italy trip  next month and too lazy right now to do a new entry so here’s a recycled one.

James E. Windward, “funeral director to the stars” or at least to all the best Fall River families (translation: Bordens, Braytons, Durfees, Chaces, etc.) during Lizzie’s time, was at the Borden house with his assistant around 4:00 pm on August 4, 1892. As Doctor Dolan testified, it was Undertaker Winward who removed the money from Andrew’s clothing and gave it over to him.

Winward had to wait until the in-situ crime scene photographs were taken and preliminary autopsies were concluded before he could claim possession of the bodies for preparation for Saturday’s funeral services. Could it be that Lizzie told him directly or had it conveyed to him as a discreet request by another (Alice? Uncle John?) that she wished her father to be “laid out” in his Prince Albert coat because it was such a signature garment to all those that knew him? The same Prince Albert coat that was photographed crumbled up under his head on the sofa. The same Prince Albert coat that his usual custom was to hang on a hook when switching to his more comfortable coat in which he wore in death? The same Prince Albert coat that is not on the list of clothing buried nor presented at Trial. The same Prince Albert coat that magically disappears like socks in the dryer. The same Prince Albert coat that District Attorney Knowlton alluded to as a possible shield against the assailant’s own clothing during his Trial summation? The same coat that had it been laid out and studied would have had telling blood splatters and not just a large stain from the seeping wounds of the ten hatchet blows to his head.

Let us assume that the Prince Albert coat was indeed removed from the premises by Undertaker Winward at Lizzie’s request. Let us further assume it was subsequently cleaned, pressed and put back upon the corpse of Andrew Borden. It would seem such an appropriate thing to do that his open coffin next to Abby’s in the Sitting Room would warrant narry a comment pertaining to evidence. “How peaceful he looks with his head on the side, and isn’t it natural that he should be wearing that oh so familiar coat?”, one might have commented to another.

Fast Forward – Oak Grove Cemetery:

The mortal remains of Andrew Jackson Borden lay crushed from a collapsed coffin, wood fragments embedded in the decomposed and tattered fabric of a certain Prince Albert coat. A high school ring dangles from his skeletal finger and his skeletal foot stretches out to just inches above Lizzie’s head. Each day at the stroke of 11:00 am, he shoves his foot against her head and in a muffled but strident voice only the dead can hear he speaks out to her: “Bad girl, Lizzie. Bad, bad, girl.” Thus, every day throughout eternity she hears those words at the stroke of Eleven – Lizzie’s own hellish, eternal doom.

I’d be willing to bet if Andrew’s grave were dug up, the collapsed coffin opened, there we would find the mortal remains of Andrew Borden. His head would be detached and displaced but he’d be dressed in that Prince Albert coat.

Clever girl, Lizzie. Clever, clever girl.

Lizzie Borden & Emma Borden – Handwriting Analysis

In March of 1989, Frances Allbright, graphics evaluator, submitted her solicited evaluation of the personalities of Lizzie Borden and Emma Borden from an analysis of their handwriting to Florence Brigham of the Fall River Historical Society.

I dug up from my files this Swansea farm deed and post it here because it shows both their signatures (along with their business/real estate manager Charles Cook) from 1910, when they were older.

It is my recollection that Mrs. Brigham provided Allbright this document as well as a letter written by Lizzie, and Emma Borden’s postcard from Scotland written to Mrs. Brigham’s mother-in-law, Mary Brigham, a friend and witness for the Defense at Lizzie’s trial. It’s my recollection from a conversation but I am not certain these were the documents.

Mrs. Allbright’s cover letter to Florence and her “profiles” of the sisters can be seen below. Personally, I tend to put more validity in such interpretations when the “evaluator” has no knowledge of the person doing the writing. It should be mentioned that these are not the only handwriting analyses of the Borden sisters that have been done, but you can draw your own conclusions with this particular evaulator.

 

AUGUST 3 & 4, 1892 – THE BORDEN MURDERS TIMELINE

I’ve been in Fall River the past 2 days and will be here nearly a week staying at the B&B doing my usual research jaunts to environs near and not-so-near.  My buddy Carl and his wife Linda, whom I met in 1989 and live in Swansea, went with me to Oak Grove cemetery around 9 pm last night and dang if the gates weren’t wide open!  When I was here in April  they were were closed and locked at night.  Robert Doherty, Jr. visited The House recently (great grandson or great-great-grandson, hmmm?)  Also last night there was a couple from Canada staying at 92 Second Street and the husband subscribes to the “Lizzie did it in the nude” theory.  I find men, in particular, are partial to that.   Fall River Herald News got the wrong “Andrew Borden” pic up in today’s write-up on the Victorian Mourning “live theatre” to be performed on Saturday, but hey, as they say any publicity for The House is good publicity.  Weather is absolutely beautiful today in Fall River, unfortunately I’ve spent most of the morning in the Fall River Room at the library…and so now another Bordenia blog.  “We blog.  Therefore we are.”

 

Let us remember:

“It was a horrible crime. It was an impossible crime. And yet it happened.”  

-Hosea Knowlton, District Attorney

-As we approach yet another onslaught of redundant “On this date” media mentions and website wordsmithing concerning America’s 115 year old classic unsolved crime, here’s an extract from my work-in-progress Timeline.

The What is a given. The Who and the How badger our brains for a solution. Well, for some anyway. For me, it’s less a Who-dunnit than a How-dunnit. But let us examine this resource for the When of things.

It should first be mentioned that times given are based on various testimonies taken from the Fall River Police Witness Statements, Coroner’s Inquest, Preliminary Hearing and Superior Court Trial and are approximated as close as possible. It is nearly impossible to construct an absolutely correct Timeline for the following reasons:

1. Witnesses often changed their statements among any two or more of the above cited source documents and, having forgotten or realized their times were off, may have knowingly changed their testimony in order to be more credible.

2. Clocks and watches were not all in sync, and not all testified as to how they fixed the time.

3. Witnesses often drew their recollection of the time based on their routine daily schedules which cannot be precise day-to-day.

Conflicting testimonies from the same witness are sometimes shown and cited here. It is important to realize that there are three – and only three – times that definitively establish the window of opportunity for Andrew’s murder, the explosive first knowledge of the crime and subsequent entry into the house by “outsiders”. These 3 times are :

1. Bridget hearing the City Hall clock strike 11:00.

2. Officer Allen noting the time as 11:15 when City Marshal Hilliard received the call.

3. The 11:32 am timestamp on the telegram Dr. Bowen sent to Emma.

All others are at the least conjecture in comparison, or at the most best-guess estimates – much like the following:

AUGUST 3, 1892
THE DAY BEFORE THE MURDERS:

8:00 am Abby goes to see Dr. Bowen & tells him she fears she’s been poisoned. 9:00-10:00 Dr. Bowen gos to check on the Bordens notices Lizzie rushing up the stairs. Bowen is rebuked by Andrew for his unsolicited professional call.
10:00-11:30 am Lizzie visits Smith’s pharmacy on Main & Columbia Street & attempts to buy prussic acid from pharmacist Eli Bence. (PH310)
12:00 Noon Lizzie joins Andrew and Abby for the supper in the dining room.
12:35 am Uncle John Vinnicum Morse takes the train from New Bedford to Fall River. (CI98)
1:30 pm Morse walks from the train station to the Borden house.
2:00-4:00 pm John Morse and Andrew talk in Sitting Room; Lizzie hears their conversation. (TT141)
4:00 pm John Morse hires horse and wagon at Kirby’s Stable and drives to Swansea in late afternoon. (CI 99)
7:00 pm Lizzie visits Alice Russell with telling her she’s afraid “something will happen”.
8:45 pm Morse returns from Swansea, talks in sitting room with Andrew and Abby. (CI99)
9:00 pm Lizzie returns from Alice Russell’s, enters and locks the front door and goes immediately up to her room without speaking to her father or uncle.
9:15 pm Abby Borden retires to bed.
10:00 pm Andrew and Morse retire to bed.

AUGUST 4, 1892
THE DAY OF THE MURDERS:

6:15 am Bridget goes downstairs, gets coal and wood in cellar to start fire in kitchen stove, and takes in milk.

6:20 am Morse goes downstairs to Sitting Room.
6:30 am Abby comes downstairs, gives orders for breakfast to Bridget
6:40-6:50 am Andrew goes downstairs, empties slops, picks up pears and goes to barn.
6:45 am Bridget opens side (back) door for iceman.
7:00 am Bordens and Morse have breakfast in Dining Room. (Lizzie is still upstairs).
7:15 am Bridget sees Morse for first time at breakfast table.
7:30 am Bridget eats her breakfast, and then clears dishes.
7:45-8:45 Morse and Andrew talk in Sitting Room; Abby sits with them a short while before beginning to dust.
8:30 am Morse sees Abby go into the front hall.
8:45 am Andrew lets Morse out side door, invites him back for dinner.

8:45 am Morse leaves for Post Office and then to visit niece at Daniel Emery’s #4 Weybosset Street.
8:45-9:00 am Andrew goes back upstairs and returns wearing collar and tie, goes to sitting room
8:45-9:00 am Abby tells Bridget to wash windows, inside and out.
8:45-8:50 am Lizzie comes down and enters kitchen
8:45-9:00 am Bridget goes outside to vomit.
9:00 am Andrew leaves the house.
9:00 am Bridget returns, does not see Lizzie, sees Abby dusting in dining room, does not see Andrew.
9:00 am Abby goes up to guest room.
9:00-9:30 am Bridget cleans away breakfast dishes in kitchen.
9:30-10:00 am Abby Borden dies from blows to the head with a sharp instrument.
9:30 am Abraham G. Hart, Treasurer of Union Savings Bank, talks to Andrew at Bank.
9:30 am Morse arrives at #4 Weybosset Street to visit his niece and nephew.
9:30 am Bridget gets brush from cellar for washing windows
9:30 am Lizzie appears at back door as Bridget goes towards barn; Bridget tells Lizzie she need not lock door.
9:30-10:05 Andrew visits banks.
9:45 am John P. Burrill, Cashier, talks to Andrew at National Union Bank.
9:40 am Morse arrives at the Emery’s on Weybosset Street.
9:50-10:00 am AJB deposits Troy Mill check with Everett Cook at First Nat’l Bank; talks with William. Carr. (WS29)
9:30-10:20 am Bridget washes outside windows, stops to talk to “Kelly girl” at south side fence.
10:00-10:30 am Mrs. Churchill sees Bridget outside washing NE windows. 10:15-10:30 am Andrew stops to talk to Jonathan Clegg, picks up old lock; Southard Miller (at Whitehead’s Market) sees AJB turn onto Spring St; Mary Gallagher sees AJB at corner of South Main & Spring with a small package in his hand (WS10); Lizzie Gray sees AJB turning north on Second Street. (WS10, 43)
10:20 am Bridget re-enters house from side door, commences to wash inside windows.
10:29 am Jonathan Clegg (fixed time by City Hall clock) stated Andrew left his shop heading home. (TT173)
10:30-10:45 Joseph Shortsleves& James Mather finish talking with Andrew on Main St. as he heads towards Spring Street. (WS10)
10:30-10:40 am Joseph Shortsleeves sees Andrew.
10:40 am James Mather sees Andrew leave shop (fixes time by City Hall clock)
10:40 am Mrs. Kelly observes Andrew going to his front door.
10:40 am Andrew Borden can’t get in side door, fumbles with key at front door, and let in by Bridget
10:40 am Bridget hears Lizzie laugh on the stairs as she says “pshaw” fumbling with inside triple locks.
10:40 am Bridget sees Lizzie go into Dining Room and speak “low” to her father.
10:40-10:43 am Andrew goes upstairs to his bedroom and returns in a few minutes, going to Sitting Room sofa.
10:45 am Mary Chase, residing over Wade’s store, sees man on Borden fence taking pears. (WS45)
10:45-10:55 am Lizzie puts ironing board on dining room table as Bridget finishes last window in the dining room
10:45-10:55 am Lizzie asks Bridget in kitchen if she’s going out, tells her of note to Abby & sale at Sargeants.
10:50-10:55 Mark Chase observes man with open buggy parked just beyond tree in front of Borden house.
10:55-10:58 am Bridget goes up to her room in attic and lies down on her bed. (WS3)
10:55-11:00 am Andrew Borden dies from blows to the head with a sharp instrument.
11:00 am Addie Churchill leaves her house for Hudner’s grocery store on South Main. (WS8)
11:00 am Bridget hears City Hall clock chime 11:00.
11:05-11:10 am Hyman Lubinsky, peddling ice cream, drives his horse cart past the Borden house. (TT1423)
11:05-11:10 William Sullivan, clerk at Hudner’s Market notes Mrs. Churchill leaving the store. (WS10)
11:10 am Lizzie hollers to Bridget to come down, “Someone has killed father”. (TT244)
11:10-11:12 am Lizzie sends Bridget to get Dr. Bowen. (TT245)
11:10-11:13 am Bridget rushes back across the street from Bowen’s, tells Lizzie he’s not at home. (TT245)
11:10-11:13 am Lizzie asks Bridget if she knows where Alice Russell lives and tells her to go get her. (TT245)
11:10-11:13 am Bridget grabs her hat & shawl from kitchen entry way and rushes to Alice Russell’s. (TT245)
11:10-11:13 am Mrs. Churchill observes Bridget crossing street, notices a distressed Lizzie and calls out to Lizzie who says “someone’s killed father’. (PH281-282) 11:10-11:13 am Mrs. John Gormely says Mrs. Churchill runs through her house yelling “Mr. Borden is murdered!” (WS9)
11:10-11:12 am Mrs. Churchill goes to side door of Borden house, speaks briefly to Lizzie then crosses street looking for a doctor. (PH283)
11:12-11:14 am John Cunningham sees Mrs. Churchill talking to others then uses phone at Gorman’s paint shop to call Police.
11:15 am Marshall Hilliard receives call from news dealer Cunningham about disturbance at Borden house.
11:15 am Marshall Hilliard orders Officer Allen to go to Borden house. (Allen notes exact time on office wall clock).
11:16 – 11:20 am Mrs. Churchill returns from giving the alarm. (PH284)
11:16 – 11:20 am Dr. Bowen pulls up in his carriage, met by his wife, rushes over to Borden’s. (PH 273)
11:16-11:20 am John Cunningham checks outside cellar door in Borden back yard, finds it locked.
11:18-11:20 am Dr. Bowen sees Andrew, asks for sheet; alone with Lizzie for approx. one minute.
11:20 am Office Allen arrives and is met at door by Dr. Bowen. Sees Lizzie sitting alone at kitchen table.
11:20-11:21 am Allen sees Andrew’s body at same time Alice Russell and Mrs. Churchill come in. (Where was Bridget?)
11:20-11:22 am Allen checks front door and notes it bolted from inside, checks closets in dining room and kitchen.
11:20 am Morse departs Daniel Emery’s on Weybosset Street, takes a streetcar back to the Borden’s.
11-22-11:23 am Officer Allen leaves house to return to station, Bowen goes out with him. Allen has Sawyer guard back door.
11:23-11:25 am Dr. Bowen returns home, checks rail timetable, goes to telegram Emma, and stops at Baker’s Drug store. Telegram is time stamped at 11:32. (PH274)
11:25 am Off. Patrick Doherty, at Bedford & Second, notes City Hall clock time enroute to Station. (T589)
11:23-11:30 am Lizzie asks to check for Mrs. Borden; Bridget & Mrs. Churchill go upstairs, discover body. (PH29-30)
11:35 George Petty, former resident of 92 Second Street, enters the house with Dr. Bowen. (WSp21)
11:40 am Bowen returns to Borden house. Churchill tells him they’ve discovered Abby upstairs. (TT322)
11:34 am Bridget fetches Doctor Bowen’s wife, Phoebe. (T250)
11:35-11:40 am Officer Patrick Doherty & Deputy Sheriff Wixon arrive at house, see Manning sitting on steps, met at backdoor by Dr. Bowen, who lets them in. (T447)
11:35-11:40 am Francis Wixon and Dr. Bowen check Andrew’s pockets and remove watch.
11:35-11:40 Officer Doherty questions Lizzie who tells him she heard a “scraping” noise.
11:35-11:40 am Officer Doherty views Abby’s body with Dr. Bowen, pulls bed out to view her better. (PH330)
11:35-11:45 am Morse arrives at Borden house, first going to back yard.
11:39-11:40 am Officer Medley arrives at 92 Second Street. (T686)
11:40-11:45 am Doherty runs to Undertaker Gorman’s shop around corner and phones Marshall Hilliard. (PH331)
11:45 am Doherty returns; Officers Mullaly, Allen, Denny, and Medley arrive.
11:45 am Dr. Dolan arrives, sees bodies.
11:45 am Morse walks thru side gate, talks to Sawyer at side door, (later testifies he heard of murders from Bridget.)
11:45-11:50 am Morse sees Andrew’s body, then goes upstairs and sees Abby’s body.
11:50 am Morse speaks to Lizzie as she lays on lounge in dining room.
11:50-11:55 Lizzie goes up to her room.
11:55 am Asst. Marshall Fleet arrives; sees bodies; talks to Lizzie in her room w/Rev. Buck, says “…she’s not my mother, she’s my stepmother” (PH354)
11:55 am Morse goes out to back yard and stays outside most of the afternoon.
11:50 am -Noon Deputy Sheriff Wixon climbs back fence cutting his hand, and talks to workmen sawing wood in Chagnon yard. (TT452)
11:50-Noon Doherty, Fleet and Medley accompany Bridget to cellar where she shows them a handless hatchet in a box on a shelf.
12:15-12:20 pm Officer Harrington arrives at the Borden house. (WS6)
12:25 pm Officer Harrington interviews Lizzie in her bedroom (she wears pink wrapper). (WS6)
12:45 pm Marshall Hillliard & Officers Doherty & Connors drive carriage to Andrew’s upper farm in Swansea.
3:00 pm Bodies are photographed by Walsh. (PH160)
3:30 pm Crime scene photographs are taken of Andrew & Abby.
3:40 pm Emma leaves on New Bedford train for Weir Junction to return to Fall River. (CI107)
4:00 pm Stomachs of Andrew and Abby removed and sealed by Dr. Dolan.
5:00 pm Emma returns from Fairhaven and arrives at the Borden house. (TT1550)
5:00-5:30 pm State Detective George F. Seaver arrives from Taunton. (PH453)
5:30 pm Dr. Dolan “delivers” bodies of Andrew and Abby to Undertaker James Winward. (PH388)
6:00 pm Alice leaves 92 Second Street to return home for supper. (CI149)
8:45 pm Officer Joseph Hyde, observing from a northwest outside window, sees Lizzie & Alice go down cellar.
9:00 pm Officer Hyde observes Lizzie return to cellar by herself.
Sources:

1. 100 Years of The Boston Globe. Louis M. Lyons. 1971
2. A Fall River Incident, Jno. Gilmer Speed, 1895.
3. Constant Turmoil-Politics of Industrial Life in 19th Century. New England. Mary H. Blewett. 2000.
4. The Democrat & Chronicle Newspaper, Rochester, New York
5. Description and Biographical Record of Bristol County, MA. Hon. Alanson Borden. 1899.
6. Fall River – A Pictorial History. Judith A. Boss. 1982.
7. Fall River and Its Industries. Frederick M. Peck and Henry H. Earl. 1877.
8. Famous Front Pages from The Boston Globe, 1982-1972
9. History of Fall River, Massachusetts, Henry M. Fenner. Fall River Merchants Association, 1911.
10. Inquest Upon the Deaths of Andrew J. and Abby D. Borden, August 9 -11, 1892, Volume I and II. Fall River, MA: Fall River Historical Society
11. Lizzie Borden Murder Case Chronology. Neilson Caplain. Lizzie Borden Quarterly, Jan. & July 2001.
12. Lizzie Borden, Past & Present. Leonard Rebello. 1999.
13. LizzieBorden Sourcebook. David Kent and Robert A. Flynn. 1992.
14. Preliminary Hearing, Second District Court, Fall River. August 25-Sept. 1, 1892.
15. The Phillips History of Fall River, Fascicles I, II, and III. Arthur Sherman Phillips. 1941.
16. Trial Transcript (Commonwealth of Mass. vs. Lizzie Andrew Borden).
17. Victorian Vistas, Fall River 1865-1885. Philip T. Silvia, Jr. 1987.
18. Victorian Vistas, Fall River 1886-1900. Philip T. Silvia, Jr. 1988.
19. Victorian Vistas, Fall River 1901-1911. Philip T. Silvia, Jr. 1992.
20. Witness Statements (Fall River Police Department officer interview reports)
Key:
ASPI, II, III = The Phillips History of Fall River
AB = Arnold Brown
Beasley = David Beasley, McKee Rankin & Heyday of American Theatre
CI = Coroner’s Inquest
D-C = The Democrat & Chronicle Newspaper
DK = David Kent, Forty Whacks
ER = Edward Radin
ES = The Evening Standard (New Bedford)
Fenner = History of Fall River
FREN = Fall River Evening News
FRHN = Fall River Herald News
FRI = A Fall River Incident
HBW = Borden Genealogy, Hattie Borden Weld
KP = Knowlton Papers
KPC = Knowlton-Pearson Correspondence
LR = Leonard Rebello, Lizzie Borden Past and Present
NYT = New York Times
OG = Oak Grove (taken from Headstones)
PH = Preliminary Hearing
TT = Superior Court Trial Transcript
VL = Victoria Lincoln, A Private Disgrace
VVI = Victorian Vistas, Volume I
VVII = Victorian Vistas, Volume II
VVIII = Victorian Vistas, Volume III
WP = Washington Post
WS = Witness Statements

Faye Musselman©1998 All Rights Reserved

“MR. ROBINSON! TEAR DOWN THAT FILE CABINET!”

Jun. 29th, 2007

 

 

George Dexter Robinson Blue Flo Plate of Gov. Robinson

3X Governor of Mass. private collection of Faye Musselman

Headed Lizzie’s defense team On loan to Lizzie Borden Bed & Breakfast

 

from South Coast Today April 14, 1998

“By Paul Edward Parker, Providence Journal-Bulletin

FALL RIVER — In a locked storage room on the 16th floor of a high-rise office building in Springfield, a five-drawer file cabinet may hold the secrets of Fall River’s most enduring mystery: Who killed Andrew and Abby Borden. Only one man has the key to that locked filing cabinet, an administrator in the law firm that, more than a century ago, represented Lizzie Borden when she was acquitted of murdering her father and stepmother. Since June 1893, the papers inside that filing cabinet have remained a secret between Lizzie and her lawyer, former Gov. George D. Robinson. But all that may soon change.

The U.S. Supreme Court is considering a case involving former White House aide Vincent W. Foster, who committed suicide in 1993. Whitewater prosecutor Kenneth W. Starr has demanded to see notes of a conversation between Foster and his lawyer just days before the suicide. The high court will hear oral arguments in that case on June 8, with a decision expected in late June or early July. The court will decide whether attorney-client privilege, which protects the secrecy of the relationship between lawyers and their clients, continues after the client dies. It is the attorney-client privilege that has kept the Robinson papers out of the public eye for 105 years. Though Lizzie is long gone, her lawyer lives on, in the form of Robinson, Donovan, Madden & Barry, the law firm that succeeded Governor Robinson’s firm.

The Supreme Court’s pending ruling opens a tantalizing possibility to historians and Borden buffs. “Would we like to look at Robinson’s papers? Absolutely, of course,” said George E. Quigley, president of The International Lizzie Borden Association.

Said Michael Martins, curator of the Fall River Historical Society: “Any documents that pertain to a case as notorious as the Borden case, a great unsolved murder mystery, would be of tremendous interest to researchers and scholars.” The historical society is home to the largest collection of Borden material, including the papers of prosecutor Hosea M. Knowlton and City Marshal Rufus B. Hilliard, Fall River’s police chief at the time of the murders. “I’m sure it’s an interesting collection,” Martins said of the Robinson papers, “but I doubt there’s anything that’s going to prove the case.”

The types of documents in the collection are as mysterious as what they might say.
Bruce Lyon, administrator at the Robinson firm, said the collection includes newspaper clippings and other materials that were publicly available. It also includes a lot more material, he said, all of which is privileged.

Around the time of the 100th anniversary of the murders, in 1992, the firm consulted with the Board of Bar Overseers, the agency that oversees the conduct of lawyers. The board informally advised that not only does the attorney-client privilege bar the firm from releasing the papers, it prevents the firm from disclosing the nature of what it holds. Lyon said the Robinson papers have been catalogued and placed in protective document holders, but he could not say anything more.

Speculation is that the files might contain letters between Lizzie and Robinson; letters between Robinson and other lawyers involved in the case; Robinson’s notes, both strategic preparations and documenting how the trial progressed; and other documents relating to testimony at the trial and preliminary proceedings.

Few expect to find anything directly incriminating Lizzie, such as a signed confession. But the papers may hold bits of information that may have seemed inconsequential at the time that, viewed with a modern understanding of the case, might bolster one or more theories of the crime.

“Some things in there might be historical,” Quigley said. “There might be statements in there that might be damning or might be helpful to her. There would be notes that Robinson wrote about the case that would be telling. Who knows.”

The Supreme Court’s ruling will probably only deal with whether lawyers can be ordered to divulge material relating to dead clients. A ruling paving the way for release of the papers would only be the first step to their becoming public. If the Robinson papers became publicly available and the law firm wanted to lend or donate them to the historical society, Martins would be happy to accept them, but added, “we wouldn’t go after them.”

Martins said the society, in such a case, would probably seek to publish the papers, a painstaking process involving years of transcribing handwritten notes. The society published prosecutor Knowlton’s papers in 1994, and has been preparing the roughly 600 documents in Hilliard’s papers, which are still several years from publication. Despite the keen historical interest in the material, even Martins and Quigley are hesitant to advocate that the Supreme Court extinguish the attorney-client privilege upon a client’s death.

Quigley noted that Foster has living relatives, who could be hurt by the release of confidential material. “Lizzie, it doesn’t matter,” he said. “She’s dead. She’s dead a long time.”

Martins thinks the privilege should be extended even to the long-dead accused ax murderess. “Personally, I think Lizzie Borden bought and paid for her defense,” he said. “Isn’t it important that they protect the documents of their former clients? I think it’s important that they do that.”

***********************
The Supreme Court, using the case of Vincent Foster, ruled that lawyers must still maintain the attorney-client privilege, even when the client is dead. Personally, I can see the merits of this with regards to private correspondence. But the firm most likely has what remains the only surviving copy of Bridget Sullivan’s Inquest Testimony. Testimony from all others called by District Attorney Knowlton has long since been made public via the “Jennings hip bath collection” sold by the Fall River Historical Society. The Inquest was a legal proceeding and if this firm does have Bridget’s testimony, it surely is not “material between lawyers and their client” and, IMHO, should be released and made public.

About 5 years ago I sent an email to attorney Jeffrey McCormick (no longer with the firm) following up on Jules Ryckebusch’s earlier plea in 1992 to release the files. I received a prompt and courteous email response citing their standard reply as indicated above.

The firm has evolved and grown, now known as Robinson Donovan P.C. Check out their website: http://www.robinson-donovan.com/index.epl

Tags: george dexter robinson, robinson donovan p.c., robinson law firm