1. "Lizzie's Hat"
Posted by Kat on Sep-28th-03 at 5:21 PM

This is really a wondering about Emma.

Lizzie supposedly comes in from outside and puts her hat down in the dining room, before entering the sitting room and finding Andrew's body.

She says she was in the yard or in the barn or in the yard and in the barn before her return.

Lubinsky says he see's a woman, who is not Bridget, coming from the east toward the steps to the house.  He sees no hat.  The woman is wearing a dark-colored dress.  He sees this person from about 65 feet away, with a tree in full leaf in his line of sight.  This is "after 11".

Dr. Handy says he saw a pale-faced  man:
Porter,50-51:
"There was a peculiarity about the man . . . The individual was about 30 years of age, five feet five inches in height, weight perhaps about 125 or 130 pounds.  His clothes were of light gray of just what cut and texture the doctor could not positively state;  nor could he tell whether the man's hat was of felt or straw . . . He was pale, almost white;  not with the ghastly pallor of a sick man, but rather the whitish appearance of a man whose face had not been touched by the sun's rays;  who might have been in confinement, or whose work was of such a nature as to keep him constantly in a cellar . . . he appeared to be in a state of intense nervousness . ."

--This description has always reminded me of a woman.  Short, very pale complexion.  Dressed in male clothing, loitering and looking nervous.  Handy went on later to say he thought he had seen the person before.
Prelim.
455
Q.  Did you ever see the man before?
A.  I could not state that I have.
Q.  What is your opinion?
A.  My opinion is that I had seen him before.
Q.  When and where?
A.  Within a few days on Second street.
Q.  On that same street?
A.  Yes Sir.

--This person had a hat.  Lizzie had a hat.  The person Lubinsky saw did not have a hat.
--A person can use a hat for a disguise.
What if Emma came back that Thursday and impersonated these 2 people?
Handy saw the individual somewhere between 20 after 10 and 20 of 11 a.m.
The barn could have been the place to change clothes.
Emma has time to be seen out front dressed as a suspicious character like who Lizzie complained of to Alice Russell the night before.  She/he is seen by Handy and what seems familiar to him is that he is seeing what his brain won't register.  Emma dressed as a man.
Then Emma goes to the barn and dresses in the dark dress.
Why dark, I don't know, unless Lubinsky saw a light dress in shadow?
She is then seen by Lubinsky outside without a hat *walking slowly*.
She then can leave and go back to Fairhaven.
Bridget notices no one outside.  I believe she was inside by 20 past 10 or so.
--The thing is...Emma paid for 1/2 of Lizzie's defense.  She admits that's a lot of money but will stand by her no matter what.  Knowing these girls and how they hang onto money, this huge generosity on Emma's part has seemed suspicious to me.  Unless Emma was in on it why should she pay?  If she thought Lizzie was innocent why not pay for the whole thing?
This kind of complicity would tie the 2 girls together so neither could speak.  That would be why the Borden girls never explained.

I always liked the Emma theory -- it made perfect sense to me. I
think I must be the only fan of Spiering's book in the Lizzie world,
RayS has that William Borden book & I have the Emma book. I can
see them plotting & trying to figure out how to rid themselves
of the folks & Emma having the idea come to her that way, or even
them planning it. I mean, it seemed like the killer arrived & then
left -- there was no trace of them having been there besides the
bodies. Lizzie burned a dress, but they never found the weapon, a
hatchet handle seems too long to go in the stove fire....

Speaking of the paleness -- Victorian women were so proud
of their pale skin, even a man who worked inside would have
had some color from riding in an open buggy or from some sort
of outside hobby. But a woman would have always had a hat on.

i admire your effort.  this is very original.  a good example of the kind of thinking that some would dismiss as "fictionalizing" which is actually a good exercise of the mind when certain "facts" are missing.  beyond that, i don't know what to say about it.  except it would be great if more and more "clicked" until it presented an actual solution.  what is lizzie doing when emma walks back from the barn, for example?

Interesting theory, Kat.  So, your thought is that Emma went outside dressed as a man to form some sort of red herring, there was a strange pale man wandering around out front of the Borden house the day of the murders.  If she did it, I can definitely see her coming dressed like that to throw off suspicion and that would mean none of the girl's dresses were bloodstained.  Which would make me wonder why Lizzie chose that particular time to burn a dress that the police wanted to examine?  If she burnt it for the sole reason to arouse suspicion of herself, she was playing a dangerous game. 

I appreciate your reactions you guys.
This is something our dad, myself and Stef kicked around way back when. 
Maybe, tho, Emma did the deed and Lizzie's role was to be seen outside?

Both girls benefitted.
And the fact that both Paid for Lizzie's defense seems like they are sharing in everything.  I wonder if Lizzie got tired of Emma being always perceived as the good, loyal sister standing by her incorrigable sister Lizzie.  Lizzie might just start acting up at That!

I am collecting *Emma Did It* sources for us this morning.
Note, in Knowlton Papers, 1994, there is a fascinating letter by a British Justice's daughter with an Emma theory.
We only bought that book after our father died, so the speculation contained there-in was also favored around our dinnertable prior to 1987.
It was amazing to read the fact that then, as now, people can think alike!

--PS:  haulover:  It is so very helpful when trying out theories, to have 4 people in a room dedicated to discussing this case...our core family.  It's like having a head-start. Everyone who has this chance is so lucky!

(Message last edited Sep-29th-03  8:32 AM.)

Rebello:
Rebello, Leonard. Lizzie Borden: Past and Present. Al-Zach Press, 1999
138

"Emma Did It

Oursler, Jr., Fulton, Behold This Dreamer! An Autobiography, Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1964, 366-367.

Fulton Oursler, in his autobiography, recalled a conversation he had with Louis Howe, Franklin D. Roosevelt's closest political advisor and friend. Mr. Howe was married to Grace Borden Hartley of Fall River. She was a cousin of Lizzie's and a major benefactor of Lizzie's estate. Mr. Howe told Fulton that 'Lizzy' [sic] didn't kill her parents. It was Emma who 'stole back from Marion' [sic] [Massachusetts] and killed Abby and Andrew. Emma was 'crazy' and suffered from 'epileptic fits' according to Mr. Howe. 'Lizzy discovered Emma and sent her back to Marion.' "

--This would be prior to 1933 when Pearson's Legends of Lizzie was published containing Howe's theory.
.......................
"Frank Spiering, author of Lizzie (1984), believed Emma committed the murders."
................
(Knowlton Papers:)   Commonwealth of Massachusetts VS. Lizzie A. Borden; The Knowlton Papers, 1892-1893. Eds. Michael Martins and Dennis A. Binette. Fall River, MA: Fall River Historical Society, 1994.

HK062  [PARTIAL]
Letter, handwritten in ink, enclosed in holograph envelope.

September 5th /92
Scotland -Mass - United States -
To
District Attorney Knowlton &c &c
New Bedford -
Dear Sir:

"..... I am no 'crank' - but the daughter of an English Chief
Justice - whose name has been known in almost every household in the
British Islands - as well as in the British Provinces - who has filled most
important offices - the first ones signed by 'King William' the Fourth - His last ones by Her Most Gracious Majesty Queen Victoria -
He has been Judge of Probate - Judge in Chancery &c &c -and been
twice a member of the Legislature - and has written most valuable Law
books - used in every Court in the Dominion of Canada - whose
Judgments have never been appealed against but in one instance when it was taken to the Privy Councel in England when his Judgment was confirmed.
You will most naturally ask - what has all this to do with me - or the
matter you wish to speak of - only this - to shew you that the daughter of such a man would be likely to have common sense - if no other kind ...

... After reading the papers day by day - those of them I got - for I am
sorry to say I've missed some - my first impression was - and now again is - that 'Emma' was the guilty party - But you say she was away therefore could not do it -You know better than myself whether she could bridge the distance in the time –

Remember she was in the house of an old,couple who would be likely
to retire early - or she - 'Emma' could have made an excuse for so
doing on the plea of having to go out early in the morning to visit friends
or shop &c &c and not being suspected she would not be watched by the old couple - but would get home in the afternoon unsuspected - and not having visited any friends in the meantime they would not enquire for her thinking - if they knew of it - that she was at the old couple's -

As I say my first impression was that it was 'Emma' not 'Lizzie' - nor
'Morse' nor 'Bridget' I never for one moment - nor do I believe it now -
that it was either a Thief -maniac - or outsider - It seems incredible to
think it - and as for the supposition that it was two maniacs that is simply absurd - No two maniacs could plan and hold together so long as to do it- it is most unreasonable to think it - At same time it may be possible there were two engaged in the horrible butchery - or a knowledge of it by 'Lizzie' and her endeavour to screen her sister -...

..... Now I want you to pay attention to what  'Dr. Handy' says - The
mans whole appearance and walk was most peculiar - That he had a very full white forehead - To see that his hat or cap must have been well off his forehead - Now in such extreme heat - as we were then having - was that not rather strange? Would he not have been more inclined to shade his face -unless he had something concealed in his hat -a 'hatchet' without a handle -the latter could easily have been burnt - Again - if it were 'Emma' disguised in man's apparel would not her walk be peculiar - especially if she were agitated - and knowing the 'Dr.' also and fearing to be recognized would turn aside in walking - and not accustomed to the clothes she would feel very strange in them - If it were 'Emma' could she not have left Fair Haven in her own clothes gone into some wood and hid them - then returned and made away with the others...

I wish to say this - that while 'Dr. Handy' thought it his duty to tell
what he saw I have a suspicion that he did not tell you he recognized
'Emma' for it was not his duty - he might think - to betray his old friend's
Daughter..."
.........
....     " I remain
most respectfully
'Mrs. H. F. Worrall' "

..........................
Inquest
Emma
111+
Q.  Did you know of anybody who was not on good terms with your step mother?
A.  No Sir, I dont think I did.
Q.  Or of any trouble she had ever had with anybody?
A.  No Sir.
Q.  Were the relations between you and your step mother cordial?
A.  I dont know how to answer that. We always spoke.
Q.  That might be, and not be at all cordial.
A.  Well, perhaps I should say no then.
Q.  Were the relations between your sister Lizzie and your mother, what you would call cordial?
A.  I think more than they were with me.




(Message last edited Sep-29th-03  8:50 AM.)

Another "Emma did it" item is the play "Goodbye, Miss Lizzie Borden" by Lilian De La Torre copyrighted in 1947.

It's possible but I just can't see Emma dashing back to FR, doing something, waiting around an hour or an hour and a half and then dashing back to Fairhaven without being missed by the family she was visiting.

There's gotta be a way.
In this scenerio Emma was involved. 
How long a trip would that be?
From Fairhaven to F.R., hang about, and get back?

There's a lot of problems in her transportation. How does she get back and forth? 

Does she take the train? If so, how does she get from the Brownells to the Fairhaven station and then from the FR station to 92 Second? The same problem applies to the return trip. She would have to hire carriages for both.

If she comes by carriage she has to hire one in Fairhaven. Was there a stable near Green St. in Fairhaven?  I think I remember reading that Lizzie and Emma went for rides when thay had the horse so its possible she may have known how to drive. Then you have the problem of where she would park the carriage. Going back she has the reverse problem of getting from the stable to the Brownells.

If you involve her in both killings that is a substantial time to be away from Fairhaven without being missed. She would have to get there before 9am and leave after 11am, a minimum of 2-1/2 hours, probably closer to 3 when you factor in travel time.

She would have gotten back close to 12 noon and I'm sure the Brownells would have noticed her absence.

(Message last edited Sep-29th-03  11:12 AM.)

Thanks, Kat, never read that particular letter before.  I keep coming up with more unanswered questions about Emma, was she a notorious late riser like Lizzie or up at the crack of dawn?

Hows this for a scenario, Emma tells the Brownells the night before that she shall be getting up early and going into town, so, don't wait on her for breakfast.  She tells them she will be back in time for lunch, so, don't expect her until then.  Emma tells them she will retire early and in reality, dons her disguise and sneaks out and gets to Fall River the night before.  So, Emma would be there to murder at the first opportunity.  Maybe the girls had timed this beforehand to get a feel of how long it would take to get back there?  It would be just getting back to the Brownell house in a reasonable amount of time to enable this. 

Wow, you and Harry both talked me into your ideas.
But they are incompatable.
Maybe Emma rode a horse.
When Morse talked about the girls liking to ride I figured that meant ride a horse.
We did have a discussion on how fast a carriage could go & how fast a horse.
Is it 10 miles to Fairhaven?  That might take an hour?
Susan's idea is interesting especially in the light of Morse asking, in the Witness Statements, if the killer could have been hiding in the house overnight.
(I thought he was fishing for info at that point).

W.S.
Fleet
2-3:
"Mr. Morse afterwards asked if I suspected that the murderer could have been concealed in the house last night. I replied that I did not. Then I said that he might have been in the house, but could not see how he could have been there without some of them seeing him."

I think 5 mph would be fast enough w/o attracting attention or wearing out the horse. Crank that into your timeline.

But no one asked (?) if they could have been concealed in the barn! A more likely place to hide out for the night.

The police went to Emma's vacation spot and investigated; no such mystery absence was reported. ANY facts to say otherwise?

That is very true!!!
Any solution of "Emma did it" is based on imagination, not facts.
Mrs Howe claim of "Emma did it" should be read symbolically as "an unsuspected child of Andy did it". As per AR Brown's book.

I do not think Lizzie would wear a hat to go out under the pear trees while her Dad conducted his business in private. Agree?

I also don't think the Doctor would be mistake about a walking figure. Wasn't Emma different enough in size and weight?

No facts for *unsuspected child of Andy*.
It was Mr. Howe who was interviewed by Pearson and included in his work.

I was talking about a disguise.
Handy's man was out front the house, Lubinsky's woman was 60' away in the  walkway.

I'm trying to figure out why Lizzie would take her hat outside in her own yard.

I don't think a "proper" woman left the house without her hat.

Didn't Alice Russell change her clothes before coming to the house despite Bridget's probable hysterical request to come? Just guessing on the hysterical part.



(Message last edited Sep-29th-03  12:43 PM.)

Well see this is where some come in with (Lincoln?) theory that Lizzie meant to leave the house period.
As in go.  But got caught up in the killing because Andrew returned too soon?  Something like that.  Dressed up with hat?
This part is confusing to me.
I never pictured a lady in her yard wearing a hat, unless she were gardening.
Maybe she got used to wearing a hat in her yard because of the pigeons and hadn't broken that habit yet? 

Someone had mentioned Victorian women prizing very pale skin. Lizzie might have simply wanted to protect her skin. Especially since it was a hot August day.  Or maybe she had come inside the back, grabbed her hat on her way to go out the front door and set it down before checking on Andrew? 
  I was thinking, too, about the pale man.  Entertaining AR Brown's book, perhaps a man who's been locked away in an asylum for a while would have pale skin? 
  I also remember reading about the Chagnon's (sp?) hearing someone hopping over the fence at night. Was Emma that spry?

I LOVE the pigeon theory!  They're crafty devils. When I lived in NYC I was walking down the sidewalk and saw a flash of white and didn't know what it was until later when I reached for something in my shirt pocket!!    Eewww. I was grossed out and at the same time impressed with the pigeon's accuracy.  Not a spot on my shirt, but right into the pocket. 

That's funny Kat. Those pigeons can do so damage...ask Susan.

I think when Messrs Rebello and Evans took the measurements of the grounds the side door to the front of the barn was approx. 15 feet. Once she went around the side of the barn she would have been hidden from view.  Wouldn't seem like she would need a hat but who knows.

The dressed-to-go-out scenario does make more sense for the hat.  But Lizzie herself never says that.

Re:  Brown correspondence to LBQ and other answering letters:
http://www.lizzieandrewborden.com/BrownControversy.htm

The Keller article, 1995, shows Taunton State records with a William Borden:
"The information does indeed establish that William Borden was in the asylum at one time prior to the April 20, 1901 news article. However, the time of his stay at the facility is recorded as December 8,1874 to December 2,1875. That is almost 20 years before the date that Arnold Brown supposes that Bill was committed to the asylum. "

Then we discussed whether a man could live to 40 as a paranoid schizophrenic before murdering 2 people but never being apprehended for odd behavior in the years after his confinement, and before the slaughter.

Rays imagines a person could stay overnight in the barn, but in this Emma-In-On-It theory there's no way a lady of the house would stay the night in the barn.
If it weren't for Abby, Emma would be Andrew's hostess and mistress of the house, and fixing the menus and hiring the help.

Maybe Lizzie's stories of seeing a shadowy figure lurking round the house at night while Emma was gone, was actually a reconnaisence(sp) mission for Emma to see if she could sucessfully slip away from Fairhaven?
I suppose she could go over the fence.  Maybe that's why the Chagnon's Newfoundland didn't bark...because it was Emma?

Just wanted to mention, I really enjoy the creativity you've all expressed in the Emma Dunnit scenarios.  It makes for exciting fiction: Victorian female cross-dressing, Emma charging through the night air on a horse, etc.  I could picture it all like a movie! 

Altho, I have to admit I like keeping it all simple when thinking about this case realistically. 

Did anyone else get driven crazy by this remark in the recent Rebello Interview? --

https://www.lizzieandrewborden.com/InterviewLenRebello.htm

"There are are tidbits of information about Emma that I would not put in print. This information still would not solve the crime."

I mean really, why even mention it if you have no intention of putting something in print?  You could still share the info while specifically stating it's all hearsay & speculation.  Grrr...

Maybe its my memory, but didn't the dog barking in the night awake the Chagnons? Pardon me if I disremembered.

But surely he got his information from his wife and heir?

I just saw on T.V. that a bird pooping on you is great good luck.
Oh I know.  It was on The View, I think.
They were showing a bird-poop scene from the new "Tuscany" movie.

It was that the dog didn't bark, which was so memorable.
Mrs. Dr. Chagnon excused it by saying it was old.

Mrs. Dr. and step-daughter both were up and the windows were closed.  The daughter had been playing the piano and stopped playing in order to ask what was that noise?

I could not figure out how she heard anything with windows shut and piano playing.  But they both did, after all.

Didn't they hear some banging, like a hammer (hatchet?) on wood? Knocking a board loose on the fence?

If you believe THAT, you must believe that Lizzie was guilty of the murders!!!

If thats true, my car should be incredibly lucky.  With a dead battery a couple of weeks ago I can't say thats true.  That movie looks wonderful, can't wait to go see it! 

Didn't Bridget make some mention of a hat that hangs in the hall to the side door, perhaps this is the one Lizzie put on to keep the sun off of her?  The only other way I can see it is that Lizzie is wearing one of her hats for the street, which sounds like she was about to leave.  No mention of the hat ever found on that dining room table. 

Bridget did testify in the Prelim about her hat in the back hallway:

"Q.  Did you ever see a woman’s hat hung up there?
A.  No Sir, except mine.
Q.  You hung up your own hat there?
A.  Yes Sir.
Q.  Did Miss Lizzie ever have a hat hung there?
A.  I did not see it.
Q.  A sort of a soft felt hat, or a rough hat?
A.  She might while brushing it, or something. She did not keep it there that I recollect.
Q.  Any other clothing?
A.  A shawl that belongs to the house; sometimes I used to take it on my shoulders to go to the store, or something like that."

It seems Knowlton, the questioner, is looking for a specific type hat of Lizzie's. Wonder where he got that info from.

Ah, it was the shawl I misremembered, thanks, Harry.  I've been having problems with my computer and can't seem to access my source documents on a regular basis as of late.  What a headache! 

what i don't have an interesting story for -- but what i always think of in WHAT IF's discussions that include the "hat" issue -- is this:  if lizzie is the single-handed culprit, she was pretty dumb if she came downstairs without being dressed for the street.  what if andrew's business associate or one of his tenants had knocked on the door to see andrew?  if the situation had developed in such a way that she could not kill andrew, what would she have done?  sat in the kitchen?  gone back to her room?  or left the house?

I'm still thinking about the prowler Lizzie claims she saw at night.
There was the occurence of a supposed sighting by Lizzie of a man in the yard last winter and she says she told her father.
I had always wondered why she did not tell her father of the next scary sighting she says she had, this time while Emma was gone.
That sighting ties in with the things Lizzie was telling Alice Wednesday night, because on this second occasion of a sighting she was also returning from Alice's house when she says she saw the person, but can't recall exactly what date.
She says she saw no skirts!  She's telling us it must have entered her mind that it could be a woman.  Why would she possibly think that?
The only woman she could think of and discount would be Abby, Bridget or Emma, maybe Sarah Whitehead.
Maybe the first sighting gave the idea to tell us about the second sighting - either as an invention (*There's more wrong here Alice than you know*) or as a dress rehearsal for Emma, as I speculated, to get away succesfully from Fairhaven, be spotted (as a prowler) and get away back to Fairhaven without the Brownell household knowing [edit here:  *Delano household*].  The first time would be safe if Emma were caught because no one had died yet.
This person diappeared behind the barn, according to Lizzie.  That is where the Chagnon fence is located.

Inquest
Lizzie
90+
A. No, sir. It was after my sister went away. I came home from Miss Russell's one night, and as I came up, I always glanced towards the side door as I came along by the carriage way, I saw a shadow on the side steps. I did not stop walking, but I walked slower. Somebody ran down the steps, around the east end of the house. I thought it was a man, because I saw no skirts, and I was frightened, and of course I did not go around to see. I hurried in the front door as fast as I could and locked it.
Q. What time of night was that?
A. I think about quarter of 9; it was not after 9 o'clock, anyway.
Q. Do you remember what night that was?
A. No, sir; I don't. I saw somebody run around the house once before last winter.
Q. One thing at a time. Do you recollect about how long ago that last occurrence was?
A. It was after my sister went away. She has been away two weeks today, so it must have been within two weeks.
Q. Two weeks today? Or two weeks at the time of the murder?
A. Is not today Thursday?
Q. Yes, but I thought you said she was gone two weeks the day of the murder?
A. Is not today Thursday?
Q. Yes, but that would be three weeks. I thought you said the day your father was murdered she had been away just two weeks?
A. Yes, she had.
Q. Then it would be three weeks today your sister went away, a week has elapsed?
A. Yes, it would be three weeks.
Q. You mean it was sometime within the two weeks that your sister was away?
A. Yes. I had forgotten that a whole week had passed since the affair.
Q. Different from that you cannot state?
A. No, sir; I don't know what the date was.
Q. This form when you first saw it was on the steps of the backdoor?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Went down the rear steps?
A. Went down towards the barn.
Q. Around the back side of the house?
A. Disappeared in the dark; I don't know where they went.
Q. Have you ever mentioned that before?
A. Yes, sir; I told Mr. Jennings.
Q. To any officer?
A. I don't think I have, unless I told Mr. Hanscomb.
Q. What was you going to say about last winter?
A. Last winter when I was coming home from church one Thursday evening I saw somebody run around the house again. I told my father of that.
Q. Did you tell your father of this last one?
A. No, sir.
Q. Of course you could not identify who it was either time?
A. No, I could not identify who it was, but it was not a very tall person.


(Message last edited Sep-30th-03  9:10 PM.)

If it was Emma in men's clothes, why would she be skulking around the side door?  Unless perhaps she was planning on originally commiting the murders at night and Lizzie caught her out?  Do we know for sure which door or doors Emma had keys to?  If the bolt was thrown for the night I don't think this side door was accessable? 

One other thought occured to me, the side door, who's domain was that?  Bridget's.  Someone, I think it was Kimberly, put forth the idea about Bridget having a beau.  Do you think this strange shadow could have been someone she dated that was looking for her?  Lizzie doesn't recall which night of the week it was, could it possibly one of Bridget's nights off and he checked to see if she was there or not? 

I figure if it's Emma, it's like a test, or dry run.  We only have Lizzie's information on this event.  The person, if in cahoots, didn't necessarily loiter at the side steps.  That's just the official story.  The test would be to get on the property and not be recognized.  That's just what I'm thinking about

Yes, I see what you mean.  I was getting ahead of myself.  But, do you think if it was Emma who was the murderess, would it have been easier to murder the elder Bordens at night?  Especially if Lizzie and Bridget were both out of the house that evening, they'd at least both have solid alibis that way. 

"Delano household"? Was that any relation to the Roosevelts (F Delano Roosevelt)? Do you know how they made their 19th cent fortune?

Well My direction here so far was that Emma came Thursday for solidairity, if she did come in disguise.  If they wanted a strange-looking, suspicious person loitering they might not have been able to depend on chance.
That could be Emma's role.  Provide a mysterious stranger, and impersonate Lizzie outside.  Then those two are then tied forever to the case.
In the dark those attempts would be useless.
If this works at all, Emma would have come in the evening for the *dry-run*  maybe just because that was convenient.
Or she didn't try at all beforehand, and Lizzie either did see a stranger (not in skirts), or made the person up to enhance her story of an unknown intruder.

Do you think Emma capable of killing one or both?

Rebello, 82:

"Note: Emma testified at the Inquest (p. 107) and trial (p. 1550) that she had been visiting Miss Helen (M.) Brownell for two weeks. Miss Brownell was a fifty-four year old dressmaker. Her mother, Mrs. Rebecca (Delano) Brownell, was seventy-eight years old. They resided at 19 Green Street in Fairhaven, Massachusetts. Miss Brownell and her mother were living in the house of seventy-seven year old Moses (Delano), the brother of Rebecca (Delano) Brownell and his seventy-four year old wife, Amanda F. Delano. Miss Helen Brownell and her mother were never called to testify at any of the legal hearings."

I was having a thought and I can't access my source docs right now.  When exactly did Lizzie come home from her trip when she and Emma parted ways and Emma continued on to Fairhaven?  She saw this "man" coming home from Alice Russell's and this was while Emma was away, I'm wondering what the time span was?  Alice makes it sound as though Lizzie only visits her on rare occasion, so, could it be possible this stranger Lizzie refers to was on Wednesday night, the night before the murders when she visited Alice?  I wish I could check on it, this thought hit me at work and now I can't even investigate it before posting it here!


Yes, I could see Emma doing both killings, she attested that she was the one who had the real problem with Abby.  If we can see Lizzie as the culprit, why not ol' Emmer?  So little is known about Emma and it seems as though she preferred it that way, why? 

My interpretation of Emma's story is that she is providing cover for her baby sister. I don't doubt that Emma was older and first to reject Abby, since she remembered her dead mother.

Inquest
Lizzie
90+
A. No, sir. It was after my sister went away. I came home from Miss Russell's one night, and as I came up, I always glanced towards the side door as I came along by the carriage way, I saw a shadow on the side steps. I did not stop walking, but I walked slower. Somebody ran down the steps, around the east end of the house. I thought it was a man, because I saw no skirts, and I was frightened, and of course I did not go around to see. I hurried in the front door as fast as I could and locked it.
Q. What time of night was that?
A. I think about quarter of 9; it was not after 9 o'clock, anyway.
Q. Do you remember what night that was?
A. No, sir; I don't. I saw somebody run around the house once before last winter.

--She got home Wednesday night about 9:20 p.m. so that's not the same night.
But during that period, if Lizzie really was having these sightings and premonitions, why didn't she warn her father?

Lizzie and Emma left Fall River Thursday, July 21st, 2 days after Lizzie's birthday.  They travel to New Bedford and Lizzie stays there while Emma goes on to Fairhaven.  (Did they have time to themselves in New Bedford before Emma went on?).  Lizzie returns to Fall River, Tuesday, July 26th, probably a day or two before her period.

(Message last edited Oct-3rd-03  6:47 PM.)

But if Lizzie and Emma were in this together, it doesn't make
sense that Emma would take off to NH and never see Lizzie again.
The scene in the Jailhouse is a stamp on my brain, Lizzie saying
to Emma "oh you have given me away" and Emma denying and sitting
there with her anyway as Lizzie layed on the cot with her back
against Emma, for hours and hours.  I feel that Emma split, afraid
of Lizzie and her power.  Afraid of Lizzie's new friends,  Emma
just wanted peace and quiet. If Emma was guilty in some way, wouldn't
she stick by Lizzie to protect herself?

Thank you so much, Kat!  I don't know whats wrong with my computer right now, but, its maddening not be able to access those documents!  Arrrrrgh! 

So, Lizzie was home for 8 days before the murder, do you think she would have visited with Alice twice in that short amount of time?  I'm not counting the day she returned, my thought is she would be tired from her travel possibly.  And then if we lop off Wednesday night, August 3rd we are left with 7 days.  I'm just trying to pinpoint what Lizzie says which may be impossible.  What about Tuesday also, the day all of the Bordens were supposed to be sick, think we can shave that off too?  Down to 6 days....

I think in Alice's testimony she says Lizzie visits her often...maybe more this summer as she wasn't as busy.
I'll have to double-check.
If Lizzie made up the prowler I suppose she can make up a visit to Alice.
The Inquest was touted as secret, after all...maybe Lizzie took that literally.

Actually, Lizzie probably went away the Saturday, July 30th, and possibly Sunday too*, but where and for how long, someone else may know?
(that answer would be a newspaper source).

*-Preliminary
Bridget
54
Q.  Did Lizzie go away any time after that, and before the tragedy?
A.  I cannot tell.
Q.  Did she not go away a Saturday?
A.  I dont know.
Q.  Did she go away the Saturday before the tragedy?
A.  I cannot remember.
Q.  Did she go away Sunday?
A.  I do not know.


(Message last edited Oct-4th-03  1:26 AM.)

Inquest
Alice
146
Q.  Was it at your house Miss Lizzie was visiting the night before?
A.  Yes Sir.
Q.  Spent the evening there?
A.  Yes Sir.
Q.  When did she go home?
A.  I think about nine o’clock;* it may have been five minutes before or after.
Q.  Was that quite a frequent thing, for her to visit you?
A.  She has done so more this Summer, because she has not had quite so much outside work**, but we have always visited, been friends.

*Morse says 9:15 or 9:20 p.m. is when he heard Lizzie come in.
**This has always struck me as odd because Hiram claims he's been told Lizzie didn't come 'round much to see them that summer because she was busy.
Methinks Lizzie got out of a normal visiting routine by saying she had churchwork.
Maybe that was often an excuse to go out and do whatever, claiming a meeting or such, yet Lizzie was really playing hookey?

Inquest
Hiram Harrington
135
"...what little I learned, was that he had bought the property and gave it to his wife; and of course that meant giving it to her half sister.
Q.  Did Lizzie speak about it to you more than once?
A.  Sometimes it has been mentioned in a joking way, about the difficulties. I dont know as I could put enough together to say really what was passed.
Q.  How long ago was the last time she said anything about it?
A.  I think last Winter sometime. I have not seen her at the house for, I might say all Summer, and I have inquired of my wife how it was that Lizzie had not been down. Emma has always come. And the reply I would get from her was that Lizzie was into everything, that is, the works in the church, and her time was occupied; that is what I would get from her.

Thanks, Kat.  It still seems so odd that Lizzie supposedly had this sighting the week before or the week of the murders and never mentioned it to her father.  But, she does tell Alice about it and Alice isn't the one whose home or life is in peril, why? 

I guess we may never pinpoint this exact day that this was supposed to have happened on.  It could have been checked on with Alice, but wasn't.  I'm just mulling over the idea that the whole story was a fabrication. 

Lizzie's hat is still bothering me.  If it's believed that she did go outside and did have a hat (carried it?  Wore it?) in order to re-enter the house and put a hat down somewhere in the dining room before entering the sitting room to find Andrew's body, from where did she get the hat?  I doubt she would wear Bridget's hat.  She probably kept her hats upstairs.
I believe the pressroom/closet at the top of the stairs contained hats, or at least hat boxes.  Where there's hat boxes there's usually hats.  You'd think tho, that her everyday hat would be out somewhere, possibly in her room.  The problem here is that Lizzie, in her statements, skips the part about getting her hat before going out.  If it Is kept in her room, that's another trip upstairs within sight or sound of anything in the guest room.
Lizzie's hat comes into the equation in testimony, but I think it is only to ask if Lizzie was wearing it when found by outsiders come to help.  The implication being that if she did have it on it might have protected her hair from flying blood, because the next questions are asking about her appearance and how her hair was fixed and if it looked damp.

Prelim.:
Bridget
61
Q: (That entry)...Any hooks there on the wall, or nails, or anything to hang clothing on in the entry way?
A: Yes Sir
Q: Who hung clothes there?
A: Nobody hung clothes there, except my aprons
Q: Was not there a hat ever hung there?
A: No Sir, not in that entry
Q: What, the back entry?
A: Yes Sir
Q: Did you ever see a woman's hat hung up there?
A: No Sir, except mine
Q: You hung up your own hat there ?
A: Yes Sir
Q: Did Miss Lizzie ever have a hat hung there ?
A: I did not see it
Q: A sort of a soft felt hat, or a rough hat ?
A: She might while brushing it, or something.  She did not keep it there that I recollect

....................
Prelim.
Churchill
287
Q.  Do you recollect how her hair was done up?
A.  No Sir.
Q.  Was it done up in the usual way?
A.  Yes, the way she generally wore it.
Q.  Did she have anything on her head?
A.  What do you mean?
Q.  A hat or bonnet or cap, or anything of that kind, any covering on her head?
A.  No Sir.
...............

Trial
Fleet
493+
Q.  Were you asked about that time to go to the clothes closet?
A.  Yes.

Q.  Who let you in there?
A.  Lizzie Borden.

Q.  She went and unlocked the door?
A.  She did.

Q.  Did you three officers go in?
A.  I think we did. I went in---looked in.

Q.  Tell me what you found there?
A.  We found some dresses, perhaps a dozen or more dresses, hanging up on the wall,  and some hat boxes on a shelf, and other things.
.................

i think the clues about the hat are these:

that lizzie says something she need not have said -- meaning that she must have thought it was an item that she needed to mention.

and that if she was wearing a hat the way they normally did, she would not have been wearing one with that blue and white cotton "house dress."

it would make sense in part if she at some point had on the bengaline dress and a hat -- for going out.

but she did not exactly go out unless it was to the back yard and back -- if so, some important fact is missing.

then i get into the issue of dress-changing and changing back, etc.  at which point i give up for now.

not long ago, you brought up what she said to maggie about going out== that abby had gone out, and that she herself might.  here's a thought suddenly out of the blue:  could it be that she says this to maggie to explain why she (lizzie) is dressed the way she is, with her "public" dress and hat?

this would not be the white and blue calico--which is apparently what she was wearing when they came in--not that bengaline silk she turned in.  and further, it sounds like it was the white and blue calico she also burned--yet also no one noticed blood on her. 

we'll have to decide at some point if it's possible to solve this particular part of the mystery with info available to us.

but so perplexing.  oh, and yet this to add to it -- maggie can't remember what lizzie wore the day of the murders, but she remembers lizzie wearing on the day before the murders the dress described by mrs. churchill as what lizzie wore on the day of the murders.  or am i wrong about that?

but the fact seems to be that what mrs. churchill describes is more or less confirmed by bowen, at least he says nothing to contradict it.  this is the point where knowlton jots down his note about lizzie giving a confession.  for at least, it is not the dress lizzie has turned in.

i know what i've said about this is not well-stated or argued.  but this is currently the weird arrangement in my mind.

perhaps there is a "technique" to tie it all together?

Lizzie comes downstairs about 5 or 10 minutes after Andrew returned, according to Bridget.
We don't hear that she is carrying a hat.
If she was carrying a hat, then she definetly had plans to go outside.*
If she wasn't carrying a hat (asssuming by the testimony that her hats might be kept upstairs) then she had to go back upstairs for it...which we don't hear about in her littany to Knowlton as to what she did that morning.
She settles on the statement in her testimony, that she did not go upstairs while Andrew was gone.  So she didn't get a hat then.  (Unless she did go up, and if she did get it then).
For some reason this is sticking in my mind and I do think something's missing.

As to the dress Lizzie wore, Wednesday was the day Bridget saw her wearing the Bedford cord, and Thursday Bridget does not remember what Lizzie wore.  I think if Lizzie was wearing Bengaline Thursday morning, Bridget would remember.  (Dr. Bowen never committed to a dress as far as I recall..)

It's odd that Lizzie tells Bridget to lock up if she is going out because she, Lizzie, may be going out too...but this ignores the fact there is a living, breathing Andrew on the sofa...what about him?

I think Lizzie did put down a hat in the dining room.  That simple statement sounds very real to me.  That means she had a hat and was outside.  I doubt she was ever in the barn loft, but somehow I do think she was in the yard...

......
*Lizzie says she went outside because she was waiting for her iron to heat and it wasn't.  How would she know ahead of time that she'd be going outside because of That?!  (In order to have her hat ready).

(Message last edited Oct-5th-03  10:49 PM.)

I don't know if this has been suggested yet, but, what about the coat hook/clothes tree thing in the front hall?  Possible that Lizzie kept a hat there for going out?  And unless the hat that Lizzie was referring to was a sunhat, those hats from the 1890s were tiny, they didn't cover your head, no sun protection. 

I thought about that but that's the place where visitor's put their hats.  Morse had his there when he went to leave Thursday morning.  Somehow I don't think Lizzie kept her hat (or hats) in the front hall.  We also don't know if there was a hat tree there.
There is testimony about where everybody kept their going-out things and Lizzie- or Emma's- hats for that matter, are not included in the descriptions.

Inquest, Lizzie, pg. 64: 
Abby kept her best cape in the guest room, and..."she used those drawers for her own use."

Prelim., Bridget, pg. 9:
Andrew kept his outdoor coat in the dining room

Pg. 61:
Abby kept a bonnet and shawl in siting room closet

Bridget kept a woman's hat (and a shawl that belonged to the "house") in the back entry way on the hooks...and "nobody hung clothes there except my aprons."

Pg. 61-2:
Andrew's "cardigan jacket" was kept "In the sitting room, as you go into the sitting room from the kitchen;  there was a nail there..."(by the stove.)

Pg. 62:
In the sitting room closet were kept "old coats", the implication being that they were Mr. Borden's.


--Eli Bence was asked to give a description of the outfit and hat worn by *Lizzie*, when the woman asked for prussic acid:

Prelim.
307
Q.  Did she have on a hat or a bonnet?
A.  I do not know the distinction between a hat and bonnet, hardly.
Q.  Do you see what she has on now?
A.  Yes Sir.
Q.  Was it anything like that? Was it that?
A.  I could not say.
Q.  Was it shaped like that?
A.  I could not say.
Q.  Was it trimmed like that?
A.  I could not say.
Q.  Was it low, or was it something sticking up?
A.  I should judge it was low.
Q.  Lower than that?
A.  I could not say.
Q.  Was it dark or light?
A.  I presume it was dark.
Q.  Do you mean because that is the prevailing shade, or because that is the impression you got from seeing this lady?
A.  That is the impression I got.
Q.  You would not swear that it was dark?
A.  I would swear that her dress was dark.
Q.  I am asking about her head cover now.
A.  I think you were.
Q.  Be kind enough to confine yourself to that, unless you desire to make an explanation later. I am asking about this thing she wore on her head. It was a close fitting object --- anyhow it was low?
A.  Yes Sir.
Q.  And your impression is it was dark?
A.  Yes Sir.
Q.  Did it have any feathers, or anything of that sort on it for trimming?
A.  I could not say.
Q.  Did she wear a veil?
A.  I could not say.


--I would think you are right that the strolling hats would be smaller and the sun hats more designed for shade.  That begs another question:  Was she dressed for going out with suitable hat attached?  Or was she attired in one of her morning dresses and just took out a sun-hat?  Either way, where did she get it and when?
Having a hat *ready* seems suspicious to me...if her things were kept upstairs.

Some images of Lizzie's hat(s) from the newspapers:



I think they are all the same hat!


(Message last edited Oct-6th-03  12:00 PM.)

Why is Lawyer and ex-Governor Robinson giving a clenched fist salute?

He's probably demonstrating how he would like to strangle Lizzie as she was possibly his most difficult and enigmatic client! 

Thanks, Kat.  I was always under the impression that Andrew's Prince Albert was kept in the front hall on a coat tree or something, probably something from the authors?  I can't check on Morse's testimony, but, didn't he mention something about going to the front hall to get his hat?  I don't recall if he mentioned if it was hung-up on something or just setting there? 

one explanation for lizzie not believing that andrew went upstairs is because she is upfront somewhere doing something and never knew he did go upstairs.  hat-related?  hat/dress related?

bowen on the dress:  no, he made it clear he could not commit -- but the point is that what he could say indicated that the dress lizzie had turned in was not the one she was wearing on murder morning when everyone came in and saw her.

well, so much for that.

BUT......there is something i wish you'd comment on.  this is not from evidence but i find it compelling in the realm of "what ifs."  when lizzie came downstairs, how could she afford to NOT be dressed for going out?  had someone come to either door -- there she would be, "caught" because -- how could she go back upstairs?  had that window of opportunity not presented itself, what were her options?  i think her best option would have been to leave the house -- thus her comment to maggie.  i mean, her only two choices were either to find a way to murder father -- or get out.  if some business associate or a renter of borden property had decided to knock on the front door while lizzie was ironing -- or morse or a neighbor at the back door -- what was lizzie to do then?  she must have been aware of this contingency. 

this is the best reason i can find for the existence of a hat.  if there was a hat.  the best evidence that there was a hat is in the fact that lizzie VOLUNTEERS a hat. 

but then lizzie doesn't tell us  of a plan to leave the house and go to town for something -- she just went to the barn, apparently wearing her hat.

the whole barn story is unbelievable -- it's not a well-thought-out part of a plan.  a last minute idea of how to "wrap it all up?"  and she's thinking that maggie saw her "dressed for the street?"

why did lizzie think she needed to account for her hat?



 

Your last question is basically my question.  It is still something which concerns me.

When you ask how could Lizzie afford to come down not ready to go out because she may need to make a get-away, she already didn't, did she?  She probably had on a blue dress or two-piece outfit that looked like her other blue outfits.  We don't know that was good enough for the street.  Personally, I think she wore something as similar to her Bedford Cord as possible, and maybe just the blouse interchanged with another outfit she had.
Do you think she was dressed for going out?
Lizzie does tell Knowlton that she had planned on going out at dinnertime.
And she tells Bridget she may go out.
Maybe she was dressed for the street.   If so, she would have to wear an apron, do you think, to mess about in the barn, or to kill?
I guess you are saying she just didn't mention bringing down her hat?

I don't think Lizzie meant to make a get-away.  She had plenty of time to if she had wanted to leave.
This is bothersome in the conspiracy theories.  If someone is hired to kill the elder Bordens, wouldn't Lizzie have demanded a really good alibi?  That should be included in the cost...

Lizzie didn't try to make a getaway because she didn't know that Abby was dead. Abby got the note to draw her away from the house that morning so Andy could meet WSB in secret.
(Based on AR Brown's book.)

I'm wondering if Lizzie would dress for the street at 9 a.m. when she had that little bit of personal work to do and wasn't planning on leaving until noon.
I certainly don't do that.  I have a morning dress myself, which is easy to put on and I wear it a few mornings in a row.  If it's hot out, especially, I don't change until I am ready to walk out the door.  I also don't sit around in those going-out clothes because the less I wear them the less often I have to wash them.
Basically I might have 3 outfits per day.
One to get up in and breakfast.
One to wear outside if I am going to be obviously out there.
One to wear out and about.
This way I might go several days without getting any one set of clothes dirty.
If I'm doing dirty work, like cleaning out the garage, I get into the same clothes to finish the job.
The less you dirty clothes and wash them the longer they last.
Washing wears them out.
I guess I'm saying, hey it was her house.  On a normal day we do know Lizzie wears a morning dress.*  It's not as if she had not access to her room after getting up, in order to change to go out.

[* Her bedford cord was such a dress.  Lizzie wore it Wednesday.  Picture a paint-stained, faded dress.  Picture Lizzie rushing upstairs when Dr. Bowen came over because she didn't want to be seen in that dress.]

that's fine if she didn't murder abby.  if she did, that's a whole different story.  if she gets caught downstairs after father comes home, and someone else comes in -- if that "window" had not presented itself -- does she dare sit around downstairs and chat with someone?  does she dare then go upstairs and change to go out?  at this point father is a witness.  so when is abby found?  after dinner?  at some point she is found, for sure.

i'm saying that if it eventuates to this -- the only possible alibi lizzie has is to leave the house.  otherwise, she is the only suspect, and she looks twice as guilty as she did as it actually turned out.

i'm not saying she wanted to make a getaway.  i'm saying that she must have realized that she might have to do it.  this explains the presence of a hat -- that she was dressed for going out.

that's the only explanation i can think of for the presence of the hat.  and i'm saying that lizzie's voluntary accounting of it is because she knew that she had been seen dressed so by bridget.

what other reason can we think of to explain lizzie's need to account for a hat?

as for blood stains, that is something else again.

btw, that picture of andrew in the privy -- is it just me or does all that "stuffing" look suspicious?

have you ever thought that all this "searching" for an answer to bloodstains on lizzie is faulty in the first place?  if the killer had been "splattered" would we not see evidence of it around the victims?  the consensus seems to be that it's unbelievable that there is not more blood -- but how or why does one argue with the empirical evidence?  it ain't there, so why do we expect to see it on the killer?

I'm chuckling a bit here and wish to assure readers that we really don't have a picture of *Andrew in the privy*... 
But in the Privy section of the Forum there is a clearer picture of Andrew on the couch, dead..

Haulover-  If Lizzie killed Abby she would change her clothes after, unless she wore some covering.
Then when Andrew returned, she would, at some time after Bridget saw her last, change back into her killing clothes?  Then change again before she raised the alarm?
As Edisto would say (or has said), those clothes were bulky and could be intricate and not made to be quickly donned.

But there are no bloody dresses, a fact that clears Bridget as well as Lizzie (or Emma?). Again, WSB could have put on his duster so nobody would notice the blackening blood on his dark(?) suit.
Those around at the time found nothing; and neither will the posters here.

How can we know that for a fact, Lizzie burned her Bedford cord dress and as far as I know, only she really got a good look at it.  Not Alice, nor the police.  And wouldn't a man walking through the summer streets of Fall River in a long coat draw attention to himself? 

this is getting funny in more ways that one.  "andrew in the privy" -- that might be a good photoshop project anyway.

i know it's ridiculous, but i'm hard-pressed to find anything that isn't.

"killing clothes" -- that's  a good one!  that might prove a useful term when discussing this clothing/dress business.

actually the order i was thinking was this:  bedford cord to start.  then dark blue bengaline silk.  then off with bengaline for the last murder/back to bedford cord, and keeping on bedford cord.  (i wasn't trying to account for blood, but why she turned in the bengaline silk - that perhaps she knew bridget had seen her in it with her hat and would remember and say so.)  i did consider she could put the bengaline dress over the bedford cord, but obviously i can't relate to the logistics of it.  i was saying that what mrs. churchill saw was in fact her killing clothes (how bloodless, i don't know--but that does seem to be the one she burned, so...i don't know)

so perhaps the white-and-blue ground with the dark blue diamonds (whatever it was) was the only dress she wore -- she managed to keep blood off it -- at least for those who saw it -- then decided she'd better burn it just in case.  and as for the hat, she just grabbed a hat without changing?  i know i don't have a clear picture as to the dress-wearing conventions of the time.  but i gather that people don't believe that abby would have gone out in what she was wearing (someone pointed out, it seemed perceptive, that lizzie put in how she discussed with abby her dress to explain why abby was in her "house" dress.)  i wonder if lizzie's "bedford" was in the same category as the dress abby was in?  i was thinking, "yes."

i guess that's the question i should ask.  would lizzie have thought she could leave the house wearing the cotton, calico....whatever exactly....the white/blue ground with the blue diamond..........could she have grabbed a hat and gone out in that?  i don't know.

the reason for my persistence in this is -- i'm not satisfied that a thinking lizzie could have been absolutely certain that she would be able to pull off what she apparently did pull off.  if she is interrupted, she has not only bridget as a witness but her father as well along with whoever might unexpectedly come into the house.  if this happens, she had best be able to get the hell out of there without having to go back up the front stairs.  in order to cast doubt on bridget, andrew, and whoever else is then in the house.  otherwise, lizzie is IT. 

okay, maybe she was so sure of herself, or reckless -- maybe what i'm thinking about never entered her mind.  but there's that HAT -- in this context, i'm thinking of it as a symbol for "going out."  well, she never truly "went out."  but the hat was there anyway.  or was it?  nobody but lizzie talked about this hat, but lizzie VOLUNTEERED to put that in about her hat.  i'm testing a lizzie-logic -- that when she volunteers info about something, she has a reason.  while generally, her lips are sealed.

i realize how convoluted this is.  i'm about done with it, unless somebody else can see something about it or cut through it.  am i wrong to think that this hat represents "leaving the house"?  what else could it mean?  (this is another knowlton failure, btw.) 

so lizzie talks about "going out" and that would include putting on a hat.  but "going out" would not be the barn trip, would it?

is lizzie just trying to be so proper -- that to step outside the house at all would require her wearing a hat?  and so the hat is fictional since the barn story is ridiculous? 

let me put it this way:  the dress lizzie turns in is the kind of dress that would be appropriate for the street, right?  why does she choose to turn in such a dress -- as opposed to one for wearing around the house?  i'm wondering about "type" -- not just "color."  is there significance to this?

OR, nevermind.

i hope you're getting checks from AB's heirs.  and i hope i can find as stubborn a defender when i'm ready to kick the bucket.  good work.

That was pretty long and you're thinking out loud and I appreciate it.  I'm not sure I can address all your points or the spots that agonize you.
I'm glad someone is studying *Lizzie-Speak*.  I think you would have a good handle on that.  I think someone else was also delving into that phenomenon- they might chime in.

As to Lizzie's dress:  She was wearing the Bedford cord Wednesday, as Bridget recognized it.  Thursday Bridget will not commit to the dress Lizzie was wearing.
So it either was not the Bedford Cord, or Bridget is lying, or Lizzie donned it whenever she was out of view of Bridget.  Lizzie did not have it on when Alice arrived, either. 
The Bengaline was in two pieces.  The dress Lizzie had on Thursday in front of Alice was probably also two pieces, as Alice said the top was pulled out a bit (from the skirt).  The Bedford cord was 2 pieces seemingly as we study Alice's recollection of the stove-burning-incident.
I have to say, that if Lizzie was wearing that Bengaline Thursday, Alice, Bridget and Mrs. Dr. Bowen would have noticed.
It was shown in court and the court was told by Dr. Bowen that he couldn't say if that was the dress Lizzie wore.
Mrs. Churchill says she saw Lizzie in a cotten, calico dress and Dr. Bowen said the same.
So:
If the dress was not the Bedford cord that was worn by Lizzie with witnesses, it was witnessed as a cotten calico, but not a Bengaline silk.

--Here's another odd thing about the hat:
Lizzie says she set it down in the dining room (where, we don't know) on her way to her room to sit down.
If she had a hat and was going to her room, why didn't she bring it with her?

Didn't Alice make some comment about Lizzie's dress skirt that day being a "Sateen", which to me sounds like a satiny type of material, has a sheen to it or was that in reference to the skirt being shown in court?  The Bedford cord was a light blue with a dark diamond or spot on it, the Bengaline was a dark blue with a light or white diamond or spot on it and the top and skirt material weren't the same.  Do you think its possible that there was a 3rd dress which was another shade of blue with some sort of marking on it, mix-n-match blouses and skirts?  Wouldn't it be wonderful if the FRHS actually still had this dress? 

I suggest that we start w/ D Kent's timeline in "40 Whacks".

If Andy returned home around 10:40am, and the police received the phone call at 11:15am, there is just 35 minutes to guess who was where when. Three columns to time (as best as possible) the locations of each Andy, Lizzie, and Bridget.

THIS is the most important, IMO.

Ah, I was able to access Alice's trial testimony, she was refering to the Bengaline dress in court.  She said that the skirt was silk and the waist was sateen.  So, a shiny material like silk, but, different.  Maybe there was a sateen skirt to match the sateen waist and a silk waist to match the silk skirt and both were covered with blood and destroyed?  Hence the mismatched materials?  Hmmmm. 

Ray we have everything to study that Kent had.  He cannot know more for sure than we do.
We can make our own timelines and it can be interpreted any way we want just like Kent's timeline.
When do you think you will create your own and amaze us all?
Please give us all some credit for thinking creatively, or at least don't assume we don't know what we're talking about.

Please Susan, if you have that citation, could you give the context?  I'm a bit confused as to whether you are saying Alice was describing the Bengaline that the court had, in court, and no relation to the dress Lizzie wore Thursday in her sight?  Thanks.

(Message last edited Oct-9th-03  11:40 PM.)

Yes, it was the dress that they had in court that was the alleged dress that Lizzie wore that day.  It starts on pg 415 in the Russell Trial document:

Q. What is the material of which the Bedford cord dress is made?
A. All cotton.  That dress was all cotton.

Q. And not silk?
A. No, sir.  There are different kinds of Bedford cord.

Q. While we are on it, what is this? (Exhibiting blue skirt)
A. Well, I don't know what it is.  It is silk, but I don't know what kind.

Page 416/i437

Q. What is the waist?
A. I call it sateen.

Sounds to me like Alice finally proved her worth as a seamstress/sewing teacher.  2 different materials for the Bengaline dress.  Other than this info, Alice can't recall what Lizzie had on that day and she not only saw the dress, she touched it too. 

Thanks Susan!

The fact that all these *dresses* were most probably 2 pieces, makes it seem as if Lizzie could mix and match to her heart's content.
Anyway that is 3 dresses.
The one Lizzie wore among witnesses.
The Bengaline silk no one identified in court.
And the Bedford cord which was burned.
Lizzie need not have used the Bedford cord at all Thursday, which would actually, physically, leave the calico cotten she did wear and the Bengaline which she turned in.
BUT the Bedford cord cannot be discounted because it was burned at a suspicious time.  So we are back to 3.
How did the court let her get away with That?!

Maybe Lizzie's "hat story" is as simple as this: It could be a way to "convince" herself and to demonstrate to the court that she "went out," and could not have committed the murders.  In other words, along the lines of analysis ("Why is she saying what she is saying.....How does her mind work?") she is trying to rationalize her "going out."  If she committed the murders, she "went out" metaphorically--that is, she departed from her normal pattern.  Or, if we are to believe Victoria Lincoln, she "went out" in a paroxysm of rage, insanity, fit, ot some kind.  I can hear Lizzie thinking, "Why I went out, of course I did, I had my hat....."

OOO that's creepy, Robert Harry!
I can just see it tho.

I was also thinking that we haven't even yet figured out by which door Lizzie entered the sitting room to find Andrew dead.
The hat has always distracted me into thinking that since she put her hat down in the dining room then she must have just continued on  thru the d.r. door into the sitting room.
But Lizzie says she pushed the door open to see her father.
Neither door pushes open into the sitting room.
But it's that hat that might be misdirecting us and maybe that is why she said that?  But that is so sly.  Lizzie doesn't want us to think she used the kitchen door?

Inquest
117
Bowen
I says “where is he?” The door was shut, as it usually is, I never saw it open hardly, between the kitchen and the sitting room. I went through the dining room.

From the Preliminary 3, Mrs. Churchill's testimony pg 279:

Q. Do you remember how Lizzie was dressed when she was standing there?
A. I think she had a cotton dress on, calico.

Q. Can you describe it any better than that?
A. I think the color was blue, blue and white.

Q. And the figure?
A. There was a figure on it, the shape of a diamond, it looked to me, of a darker shade of blue, navy blue, printed on it.

I realize that all the women said Lizzie was wearing something different, but, Addie's description sounds like the Bedford cord dress.  Do you think its at all possible that Addie was right and Lizzie had been wearing the Bedford cord when everyone showed up.  Lizzie having possibly covered it up somehow during the murders and thought there was no blood on it and when she went up to her room discovered there were a few spots on it.  She changes into the pink and white wrapper realizing she has to hide or get rid of this dress.  The police want the dress she was wearing and Lizzie gives them a dress, the Bengaline, that sounds close in description, 2 piece, blue, with a printed figure on it and even as Lincoln supposed, also a ribbed fabric?  Do you think Lizzie would have the audacity? 

yes, i've thought of something along that line.  i can't figure out why or if that relates to her telling bridget she might go out.

perhaps her hat was indeed somewhere in the dining room and she thought she needed to account for it?

another one i can't figure out is this (paraphrasing):  "oh yes, i know what it was; i told her to make sure the blinds were closed."  at what point, i wonder, during The Affair, would lizzie be instructing her about window-washing?

one of the great oddities you can't get around is how bridget is there for her at times, while mostly she's invisible to her.  the most striking of these being this:  that she knows bridget let father in--but immediately bridget disappears.  that's a logistical impossibility just like the "where was abby" one.

we had that thread a while back.  i remember it pretty well.  i had the idea that we had more and less settled on the notion that lizzie had "pushed" a door out of her way "that was ajar."  meaning, for example, that if it was the dining room to sitting room door -- that she couldn't quite fit through the space and took the door itself (not a doorknob) and pushed it away from her space.  not that that truly settles it, but it seemed to be a reasonable answer.  i remember at that time i dreamed of lizzie confusing that moment with another moment when she pushed out the guest room door--after she had shut it after the murder.  that's another oddity.  she says she saw it shut at some point and referred to abby's wish that it be shut to keep the dust out.  but when the body is found, it is open.

btw, i spent some time today searching the documents for DRESS info.  i sort of stumbled into this subject.  i had a creepy daydream about it, when i noticed both emma and the dressmaker remarking that this bedford cord was longer than most of lizzie's dresses.  emma explained how this was way the bottom hem would get soiled.  then i could see lizzie getting up and deciding on what would be her "killing dress."  and what a perfect choice!  a dress that was already painted-stained anyway, and so long it touched the ground (better protection for her shoes).  by creepy, i mean actually calculating that in her mind.  "i certainly won't mess up one of my pretty clean ones, but this old thing i should have burned up long ago."  and then lurking about, watching and waiting.  this would be a nice fictional touch, anyway.  maybe i shouldn't be saying so much, since i still might write a story.  i might not, though.  my biggest stumbling block to writing about lizzie (in intimate detail anyway) is that i still don't feel that i know her.  it's as though the oddities, the inconsistencies are covering her up -- or it might be that i don't yet quite believe that these "oddities" ARE lizzie.

I hear you Haulover, I want to write also but it is like a
stone wall, so hard to know LIzzie.  I watch all the true-crime
stories on tv, I have lived a long time and met many personalities
yet just NOONE is like Lizzie.  She wasn't all that smart, yet she
had the right instincts to pull this off.  I don't think she held
the hatchet but I think she was the engineer.  So many things that
happened that day, on her part were stupid, yet brilliant in the
end.  I play scrabble competitively and it reminds me of Lizzie,
it is just the luck of the letters really.  Lizzie was incredibly
lucky that day.

I realized one of the major reasons we can enjoy this case so thoroughly, and be touched so deeply with pity by it, is that we are lucky enough to have witness statements, an inquest, preliminary hearing for probable cause, and a trial.  We are showered with wonderful documents which tell their own story, each, like a good book.
Think of Jack the R.  No trial, no documents, forged letters mostly and questionable notes of the police big-wig.
That seems so unsatisfying compared to the wealth of detail we have in this case.
Thanks Knowlton & Jennings!

One thing Alice is good for is what she didn't see.
She didn't see Lizzie actually burn the Bedford cord and I have admired her for being precise in this instance.
The other thing she didn't see is Lizzie wearing the Bedford Cord on Thursday.

I believe her.  She is intimate friends (she thinks) with Lizzie, and Mrs. Churchill is not.  I doubt Mrs. Churchill had been inside the Borden home hardly ever.

Trial
Alice
394+
DIRECT EXAMINATION, resumed

Q.  (By Mr. Moody.)   Miss Russell, will you tell us what kind of a dress---give us a description of the dress that she burned, that you have testified about, on Sunday morning?
A.  It was a cheap cotton Bedford cord.

Q.  Bedford cord?
A.  Yes, sir.

Page 395 / i417

Q.  What was its color?
A.  Light-blue ground with a dark figure---small figure.

Q.  Do you know when she got it?
A.  I am not positive.

Q.  Well, about when she got it?
A.  In the early spring.

Q.  Of that same year, do you mean, or some other year?
A.  Yes, sir, I think that same year.

Q.  Was your attention called to it at the time she got it in any way?
A.  At the time I first saw it?

Q.  Yes, at the time you first saw it, and by what?
A.  She told me that she got her Bedford Cord and she has a dressmaker there, and I went there one evening and she had it on, in the very early part of the dressmaker's visit, and she called my attention to it, and I said, "Oh, you have got on your new Bedford Cord."  That is the only time I saw it until this time.

Q.  Until the time it was burned?
A.  Yes, sir.

--I would not say Lizzie did not wear it that day (because no one saw her in it) because there is a chance that she wore it if she killed, but our witnesses did not see it.

I remember reading somewhere (afraid I can't remember where) that the police found 7 or 8 blue dresses in Lizzie's closet. Easy to 'mix and match', maybe.

Yes.

Unless yr someone who pays particular attention to clothes (like Phil. Harrington?) it's really difficult to remember what anyone wore, even when asked later that same day.  The only time I remember is when someone wears something particularly striking or maybe new.  I've been testing myself about this lately...I don't tend to think of Lizzie while @ work, but if I do in the evenings, sometimes I'll ask myself what someone @ work was wearing.  Most times I can't remember.

My point being, this is something quite easy to get away with, esp if Lizzie had a lot of clothes that were blue.  & particularly the fact everyone definitely had a lot more on their mind that day...

Well, now that I can access my documents again, I had to post something from them.    But, in all seriousness, the point that Mrs. Churchill hasn't been in the Borden house on a regular basis and doesn't visit with Lizzie give some credibility to what she did see whilst there?

Do you think it might be possible for Alice to lie on the witness stand and say she can't recall what Lizzie was wearing and that it wasn't the Bedford cord?  Alice told of the dress burning because it was weighing on her mind but she was loathe to tell of it.  Perhaps she didn't want to get her friend in further hot water by saying that Lizzie was wearing that dress when she showed up that day and then burned it, it makes it seem more of a guilty act that way.  Perhaps I am barking up the wrong tree, but, I like to dig and turn over each facet of this case.  Lizzie did have like 8 dresses that featured blue in them, maybe she did have a slew of matching mix-n-match garments? 

thank you, susan.  that's exactly what i was thinking.

if you look at the description of the bedford cord as given by the dress-maker, and then look at mrs. churchill's description of what lizzie was wearing -- it seems to be the same dress.  a strong probability anyway.  (of course, lizzie could have had several similar-looking ones.)

mrs. churchill thinks it is cotton.  in fact, it is, though mrs. churchill does not know how to identify specifically a "bedford cord."

now, getting back to alice -- and this is where interpretation has to come into play:  alice does not remember what lizzie was wearing, she insists she hasn't a clue.  when she sees what lizzie is going to burn, she recognizes it; says she had not seen it since last spring when it was made.  now this is the grey area where you can rationally go in two different directions:  that alice would have noticed it on lizzie the day of the murders if it was the bedford cord since she "nails" it when she sees lizzie about to burn it -- OR that, in not noticing what lizzie was wearing that morning, then lizzie could have been wearing anything and alice would not have noticed it.  the difference on the part of alice being a psychology-of-seeing issue.  when she sees lizzie take it from the cupboard, she SEES DRESS (dress is subject or object).  on the morning of "The Affair" the subject in the eyes of alice is the shock-and-awe of the murders.

further, if you take what bowen can remember of the dress, i don't see anything in it that makes lizzie's dress NOT the bedford cord.

much of my confusion on this issue is due to a lack of a clear definition of what a bedford cord dress actually is.  doesn't the term have to do with the way the material is woven?  a bedford cord can be made of a variety of materials?

the upshot of it being this:  that there were two dresses:  the bedford cord (which has paint stains and trails the floor) and the bengaline silk (also blue, a darker blue) that lizzie "turned in" but never wore.

yet if i have one single fact wrong, then my assessment is totally wrong.  can we narrow this subject down to at least one difference in interpretation on one single factor?

btw, i know the word "calico" is thrown around.  the only definition of that i can find is "a coarse cloth" (another "fuzzy" term?  typically interpretive on the part of the user?)

 

see my response to susan #82.

alice did not see the bedford cord murder morning but she did not see anything in the way of a dress.

mrs. churchill does not say bedford cord, but she says that she cannot identify a bedford cord.  but in what she does say, is she not describing the bedford cord?

what do you think?

what bridget says about what lizzie wore wednesday also sounds like what mrs. churchill describes.  only bridget says "sprig" instead of "diamond."  i don't know that i can say exactly what sprig means in this context.

now here's a creepy thought -- that lizzie selected her "killing dress" on wednesday but never found the "killing opportunity."  (it might be interesting to know what she wore to the pharmacy or to alice's house--but it would not have been a painted-stained, soiled-hem dress, would it?)

and about the blood:  yes, i'm beginning to think everyone has labored too hard and long on the notion of a "very bloody dress."  that lizzie managed to keep it off her without such difficulty.  why don't we make this connection -- the doctors baffled about "where's all the blood" when that is empirical at the murder scenes.  if we don't see dramatic sprays and splatters around the bodies, why should we expect to find them on her?  i know there are some and they are described in detail -- but the amount, i mean. 

about who lizzie is in any kind of intimate or semi-intimate term, yes.  the only characterization i've ever seen is elizabeth montgomery's.  and as an actress i think she did a very intelligent, talented job.  but we wish to find someone ourselves, on our own, i think.

i agree.  i've done the experiment myself.  like right now -- there are 6 other people in my office at work but i can't say what one of them was wearing.  and it's not that i don't remember them -- i can tell you specific thoughts i had in regard to specific people and words spoken, etc. -- but nothing of clothing. i might think i could say the three men were not wearing jackets--but only because they never do.  one of them could have slipped one past me for all i know.  i had a long meeting with them, in close contact, and i could tell you everything that was said--but of their clothing, nothing.  the women almost never wear dresses--if they did, and it was particularly becoming, i might well remember a dress.  i have remembered a few.  i did not see legs yesterday anyway.

i'm sorry for being so verbos. but i must amend concerning one detail in my agreement with susan's post -- for fear of other confusion.

this:  susan says or suggests that at some point alice might be lying.  i'm not saying that.  in what i'm saying about alice's memory, i mean to say she is being completely truthful about it.

i thought susan was suggesting that lizzie was wearing the bedford cord that morning when alice saw her -- it's that i presently agree with.



(Message last edited Oct-11th-03  7:33 PM.)

I have read all this and I only suggest that more witnesses be gathered as to what they thought they saw Lizzie wearing Thursday.
She was seen by Mrs. Dr. Bowen, Dr. Bowen, Mrs. Churchill and Alice.  She was also seen by Bridget and Morse.
These are all people who know her and should be checked for dress descriptions.
When I checked these for descriptions I was looking for what the dress wasn't, in order to determine if it was the Bedford cord.

BTW:  Bridget did remember what Lizzie wore Wednesday but not Thursday.
How to account for that?
Short cut:  Rebello 116
"When asked to describe what Lizzie had on Thursday, the morning of the murders, Bridget replied, ' ... I can't tell what dress the girl had on.' (Trial: 271)

(Message last edited Oct-11th-03  9:52 PM.)

i will do what you suggest. actually i intended to, but others seemed to be moving in that direction (as i perceived it, anyway) and i couldn't resist jumping in.

though i can see now mrs. bowen is going to make it difficult by trying to verify the dark blue bengaline silk.  (as i recall, i'll have to look again to be sure.) i don't remember morse contributing to this, but i'll double-check.

i did understand your "what wasn't" method when i stumbled on what seemed to me "was."  in fact, i just stumbled into the dress issue while fictionalizing about lizzie getting "dressed up" to go out. 

about bridget remembering wednesday's dress:  i know what she said about it.  as to WHY?  it may or may not be -- but has a probability that it is the same phenomenon as alice seeing or not seeing.  the root of it being the context in which it is seen?  it may not be possible to account for this.  or speculation about it might lead to a completely different subject (bridget's complicity, for example).

you understand my question though:  that i did not see, because it was not what i saw later OR i just didn't see.  (IF i understood your reasoning in the alice-factor of the dress.) 

but i'll finish this tonight along the lines of your suggestion as best i can.

i don't find morse saying anything about her dress.  the one i'm least certain about is mrs. bowen, which i'll post here.

___________________________

Mrs. Bowen,  Trial:

Q. Did you notice that dress?
A. I noticed it was dark.

Q. What sort of figure should you say was on that waist?
A. A round figure.

Q. What is the figure on the dress?
A. Round figure or flower.

[MRS. CHURCHILL SAYS DIAMOND FIGURE]

Q. It is not a spray that is on the dress?
A. I should say not.

Q. You could not have any idea that the dress with the blouse was a blue dress with white material, and a white spray running right through it?
A. I could not tell the design.

Q. You would not undertake to say it was a design with a spray on it?
A. I noticed it was blue.

Q. You said it was a blue dress with white material in the blouse?
A. I said it was a blue dress and a blouse with white on it.  I think I said a white spray, at the time, but I was not sure of the design.  I meant to have stated it so.

Q. I want to know if you didn't say, "Q. What dress did she have on? A. A white dress with a waist with blue material, a white spray running right through it."
A. Yes, sir.

Q. Did you mean to convey that impression?
A. I did not mean a dress with any white, but dark blue, the dress with a blouse, that had the figure in it.

Q. You don't think that that dress was in your mind when you testified?
A. No, sir.

Q. But you had not delivered it to the officers?
A. No, sir.

Q. And when you said it was a blouse dress or blue material and a white spray, did you have that figure in your mind?
A. I had a white figure.

Q. Did you have that figure in your mind?
A. No, sir, dark blue with white spray.

Q. That would not be a blouse waist of blue with a white spray running through it.
A. That would not be in the blouse, but I did not have any reference to the particular spray.

Q. That would not be described by you in any way as a blouse waist of blue material with a white spray running through it?
A. That is what I had in my mind.

Q. That would not be described by you as a blouse waist of blue material with a white spray running through it?
A. That would not.

Q. When that testimony was given by you, do you remember the date of it?
A. I do not.

Q. What?
A. I do not remember the date.

Q. Were you an intimate friend of the family, Mrs. Bowen?
A. Yes, sir.

Q. And at that time when you gave that testimony you did not know that any question was made as to whether the right dress had been produced to the officers, or not?
A. I did not know anything about the dress.

Q. You do know you had that in mind?
A. I do.

Q. Is your recollection of it any better now than when you gave that answer?
A. No, sir.

_______________________

Mrs. Bowen from Prelim:

Q. What dress did she have on?
A. A blouse waist of blue material, with a white spray, I should say, running through it.

Q. A white spray?
A. I thought it was.

Q. What was the body of the dress?
A. I did not notice particularly.

Q. The ground of the blouse, you say it had a white spray?
A. O, it was blue.

Q. Light or dark blue?
A. I should say quite a dark shade; I cannot tell; I was not looking for fashions then.

Q. Do you know what shirt she had on?
A. I do not.  It was nothing more than an ordinary morning dress; I think I had seen her wear it before.  I only noticed the dress skirt.

Q. Something you had seen her wear frequently before?
A. Yes Sir.

Q. In the morning, or when?
A. In the morning when I have been in.

Q. How long did you stay?
A. I could not tell how long I stayed, a very short time.


____________________

i don't get any clarification from her.  when she says dark or light, i can't tell if she really means the "ground" or the "figure."  she says "round" figure.  Mrs. churchill says "diamond."  about the one worn wednesday, bridget calls it a "sprig."

i did find officer doherty describing it.  i'll put all of it tomorrow.  what he says does not contradict the general description of blue and white.  i found these two to be interesting:

Q. It had a white ground?
A. There was white to it.

Q. You mean the material, you do not mean the color?
A. I mean the material.  I thought the bosom of it was starched stiff.

_______________________

alice says the figure is a darker blue, as mrs. churchill says, but only mrs. churchill is specific enough to say "diamond."

You've hit the important part of Mrs. Dr. Bowen, thanks!

Prelim:
Q. Do you know what shirt she had on?
A. I do not.  It was nothing more than an ordinary morning dress; I think I had seen her wear it before.  I only noticed the dress skirt.

Q. Something you had seen her wear frequently before?
A. Yes Sir.

Q. In the morning, or when?
A. In the morning when I have been in.

Q. How long did you stay?
A. I could not tell how long I stayed, a very short time.


--The later description at the Trial is too confusing.  I've tried to figure out the dress by these kind of *intimate* disclosures.  Like Bridget unaccountably knowing what Lizzie wore Wednesday and Alice being sure she didn't see that Bedford Cord since the spring until it was burned.
These anecdotes, like Mrs. Dr. Bowen, are more valuable than those grueling dress descriptions.  (In my opinion).

Yes, thats great info!  What Lizzie was wearing according to Mrs. Bowen was something Lizzie wore often in the mornings.  I have found a sample of Bedford cord material, apparently it was and still is used as the material in certain cars!  Usually it is made as a cotton and wool blend for these materials.  This particular sample is 100% wool, but, it gives you the feel of the material.


From this site: http://www.hirschauto.com/samples/bedford.htm

It looks to me that if this material is washed often it would take on the appearence of blue jeans that have started to fade, they are still blue, but, have that white sheen to them. 

This site has a women's blouse that is 100% cotton Bedford cord, you can't see the ribbing in the material though, it looks like plain ol' cotton.  http://dealtime.catalogcity.com/cc.class/cc?pcd=6617806&ccsyn=48

Found a great sample after much searching of Bengaline silk in navy blue.


From this site:
http://raymondstextiles.com/898-2.gif

It does have a very similar look and feel to it.  Hmmmm. 

that is interesting research Susan, thanks! 

Thanks Susan.
I recall you found us some Bedford cord last year!

The Bengaline looks like it has a sheen - maybe that's not the word -
but the ability of the fabric to change shading in different lights.

The Bedford shown here has a rib which goes one direction, yet the Bengaline rib goes another.

Didn't Lizzie claim her Bengaline had linen in it?  That doesn't seem, in my eye, and vocabulary, to mean the same as *sateen*.  The first example of Bengaline which you show does seem to be more satin-looking, or silk-looking...that's that *sheen*.

I believe that the ribbing on the fabric is just the way the manufacturer chose to display it, if made into something I think the ribs would be verticle.

From what I read, Bengaline is made up of different materials, but, with a silk on top, I can't recall if that is warp or weft, so, its not a 100% silk material.

Sateen seems to be a smooth material, no ribbing to it.  So that blouse may have been the same color and may have had the same or similar print, but, it would have a smooth finish to it.  Found this example of sateen, lots of sheets and uniforms are made of it. 


This description of sateen is given here:
A fabric resembling satin in its glossy face or silk or rayon but the major part of it of cotton or wool. A strong durable material used widely for linings. Satin A silk or rayon fabric, worn for hundreds of years, of close texture with a glossy face and dull back. The smooth, glossy surface is produced by finishing the fabric between heated rollers.

From this site: http://www.pipcom.com/~tempus/sewing/fab_sateen.html

So, it sounds as though the blouse could have been made very similar in that it had the shiny, silky surface, but, was mostly linen or cotton. 

Thanks for all that.
I looked at the material you first posted and it's my experience that fabric is displayed in the direction it would lie.  If it was displayed any other way it would be misleading as to what the finished product would look like, though I believe some patterns might call for a different cut than usual.
I may be wrong, but I have been, in the past, to many* a fabric store.

So far there's not been a Bengaline with linen?
Linen sounds very hard to care for, before *dry cleaning*.

Inquest
Lizzie
91
Q. Was the dress that was given to the officers the same dress that you wore that morning?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. The India silk?
A. No, it is not an India silk, it is silk and linen; some call it bengaline silk.
Q. Something like that dress there? (Pongee.)
A. No, it was not like that.

[*Dragged there, I should say]


(Message last edited Oct-13th-03  1:21 AM.)

That may be totally true, I can't argue with that.  There are always garments that are cut on the bias.  I'm going by a jacket I own, it doesn't list what type of material it is by name on the label, but, is a black ribbed silk type of material.  The label states that it is comprised of silk, and/or cotton, linen, wool, etc. dry clean only.  The ribs on this jacket are vertical.  My thought is along the lines that horizontal stripes can make you look bigger, so, a garment made from Bengaline silk would tend to be made vertical instead of horizontal, but, I could be off.

Found this site, linen by itself doesn't sound hard to care for, it sounds like a very hardy material:
http://www.thelinenhouse.com/EN/AboutLinen_FromFlaxToLinen.htm

I have painted on stretched linen before and it wasn't much different from regular stretched canvas, except for being lighter in color and softer to the touch and having a much finer weave.  It was unbleached and had a light greyish brown color in appearence. 

Good find Susan.  Nice to see what Bedford cord actually looks like.

Now which shade most closely resembles the shade of blue of the Bedford cord dress she was wearing the morning of the 4th?  The descriptions of the dress have always bewildered me.

My thought is the Bedford cord was a color like that on the Bengaline silk chart, the Frost blue.  Its right next to Powder blue which looks like the Baby blue that it was stated that the Bedford cord was not.  Did that just make sense?  I always get the feel that it was some form of Indigo dye and had a faded blue jean type of color. 

I guess the next best thing here would be to visit a fabric store and get swatches of the materials and scan them.  Between the ribbing and the diamond print, it must have been one busy looking dress. 

We think alike Susan. I thought it was the Frost blue as well.  At first I thought the Dutch blue but then I remembered Dr. Bowen's description of it as drab.

I think a whole dress of the Frost blue would like kind of drab.  The Dutch blue is brighter and a darker blue.

And there is that thought in my head, how bright it was or wasn't in the house in the daytime.  Was there alot of sunlight coming through the windows in the kitchen for everyone to get a good look or the shutters or drapes drawn to keep out the heat of the sun.  That kind of light blue color would probably show up as almost a noncolor in low level lighting, almost a grey. 

The level of light should definetly be taken into consideration.  Good point.
The British family who stayed in the 1900 house noticed how dark it was inside when they left.  They picked up a decorating magazine on their way home from that ordeal, and they showed a *Victorian Decorating* section and the husband of all people said "That house is too light.  Victorian homes are dark inside."  (at least theirs was)...

Lubinsky saw a woman in a dark dress, outside.

(Message last edited Oct-14th-03  12:40 AM.)

I guess that would be a great experiment for someone to do that goes to visit and stay at the B&B.  During the day check out the rooms without any interior lights on and see what the lighting levels are.  I guess the kitchen and sitting room and front hall are all now comprimised due to the attached building. 

Maybe Stef or someone else who has visited remembers from their last visit?

Regarding transportation between Fairhaven and Fall River.

If traveling by train, Emma would have to have taken it from New Bedford, as the Fairhaven Branch of the Old Colony line did not connect directly to New Bedford across the Acushnet River. (One needed to take a horse-drawn trolley or a ferry to New Bedford from the Fairhaven station.)

At the inquest Emma states she took the train from New Bedford at 3:40 p.m. and arrived at her house in Fall River at about 5 p.m.

The train schedule in the August 5, 1892, New Bedford Evening Standard lists daily departure times as 8:45 a.m. 3:40., 6:15 and 9:40 p.m. The train trip seems to have been roughly an hour one way. (Today a bus trip along a similar route is also about an hour.)

19 Green Street [now 132 Green Street] is three short blocks (about a two minute walk) from Main Street, where there was a horsecar route to New Bedford. There were also two livery stables very close by: Bauldry Bros. And Dunham’s.

On 1892 roads, it would have been more than 14 miles from 19 Green Street, Fairhaven, to  92 Second Street, Fall River, which includes rather congested town and city streets. It would be difficult to calculate the timing by horse or horse and carriage, because the condition of the roads, traffic, etc. are unknown.

Today, even with Interstate 195 connecting Fairhaven and Fall River, the roughly 15 mile route takes at least twenty minutes, traveling at the speed limit in an automobile.

Excellent reply. That pretty much rules out Emma as a suspect, even though the FR police did that 112 years ago.

Nice detictive work Fairhavenguy. There is no way Emma could have made it back to FR to whach her parents & then back to Fairhaven. Even the Pony Express couldn't cover that distance in that time. Does this time discrepency rule out Emmas possible knowledge about the murders? No, but it shows it could not have been done by her hand.

That is excellent and clear information.  Thank you.  This is a question we have dealt with for a long time.

I don't think it rules out Emma tho, if she knew how to drive and took a team from the nearby stables, or if someone picked her up.
It might eliminate the train tho, as to her form of transportation- if Emma did return to Fall River with no one knowing.

Thank you for the info, Fairhavenguy, very helpful!

I have to agree with you Kat that it doesn't exonerate Emma as a suspect, if she did the last murder around 11:00, cleaned up and changed and possibly rode a fast horse back to Fairhaven, would it take about an hour and a half or 2 hours?  She could have been back in time, got her telegram and hopped on the 3:40 train back to Fall River.  I'm just wondering how closely the Brownells were questioned about Emma's movements up in Fairhaven? 

I can assure you then or now, no respectable family would have shielded a parricide like Emma. You might as well blame Uncle John.
He left while both were alive, his visits were studied, and returned after their deaths. A perfect alibi.
(Will somebody claim it was too perfect?)

Emma and Uncle John stood by Lizzie, whether they believed she did it or not, why can't we believe the same if Emma did it?

And by your own beliefs, Ray, Andrew wasn't respectable, he was an unsavory character with shady business dealings, perhaps the apple didn't fall too far from the tree?  All I'm wondering is how minutely Emma's whereabouts were checked for that day, was Emma with someone who could vouch for her movements say from the morning hours to about mid afternoon?  She could possibly still be a suspect. 

Great job of tracking down the train schedule, and figuring times by rail or carriage! I think you eliminate Emma as a direct participant in the crime--aiding and abetting before or after the fact, maybe, but I think you show that she couldn't have been there that morning.

--Lyddie

Andy was as 'respectable' as any other self-made man, then or now.
But his swindle of the Brayton family may not have helped his reputation. EVERYONE says Andy stayed just on the right side of the law, like some others (Bob Casey?). You know what THAT means?

It seems as if FairhavenGuy is giving information and each then will decide from that info.  He hasn't given his opinion.
I still think the girls knew how to drive and/or ride, so the livery stable close by has my attention, no longer the train. 

Well we have John Morse's Inquest testimony as to whether Emma rode. He is asked about the last time he visited the Bordens before the August visit. 

"Q.  Did you stop all night then?
A.  No Sir, came over in the morning and went back at night. I can tell all about that time if you want me to. There was a lady came over, Mr. Davis’ daughter, with me. We drove over in the afternoon. I hired a horse,and Mr. Borden’s daughter went to ride, we went down to the steam boat. I took her home after dark." (Inquest,97)

BTW -- it's clear from the surrounding testimony that the reference "Mr. Borden's daughter" is to Emma, not Lizzie.

But I can't quite figure out what Morse and Miss Davis were doing while Emma rode.

Thanks.  You know I looked at that and I got the impression that Morse was driving a horse (a ride) and picked up Emma to go driving.
But I do recall Morse saying the girls used to ride and he had advised Andrew to get them horses?  Do you remember that?  Maybe that was in a newspaper "Interview"?

Yes, I see what you mean.  Now that whole passage is unclear to me.  Especially when a few questions later, John is asked:

"Q: .....when Miss Davis came over with you, did you see the girls then?
A.  I saw Emma; I went to ride, I told you."

I'd taken his previous statement to mean they were riding horses -- but he could be referring to the three of them going for a horse and buggy ride.  John Morse was not the most articulate man in the world.

I found an interview with Dr. Handy in the Evening Standard, (August 10, 1892) where Handy says:
"I used to ride with him [Andrew Borden] a good deal and suggest[ed] to him to get a pair of horses for the girls to go riding."

So it does sound as though both Lizzie and Emma rode.







(Message last edited Mar-12th-04  1:29 PM.)

Very good, thanks!  You never disappoint!
Dr. Handy it was.

Diana, that passage sounds to me like what Morse is trying to say is: that he hired a horse and buggy {or wagon} and went to the Borden's house with Miss Davis in the afternoon.  Emma joined them and they drove down to the steam boat, they didn't return to the Borden home until after dark.

My thought is why would John Morse come and hire a horse for Emma to ride when she could easily do that herself at any time?  And he wouldn't need to hire another horse as he just drove over with one already.  The thought of Victorian social mores comes to my mind too, a lady would never ride astride a horse in that era, I think it would be sidesaddle only.  Somehow I can't picture Emma riding sidesaddle through the streets of Fall River, though it may have been possible.  It sounds as though it was acceptable if a woman played polo or was part of a hunt, pastimes of the very wealthy.  From what I can ascertain, women didn't ride horses astride until about the 1910s and they were still not considered the norm.

Here is an 1890s ladies riding outfit, note the sidesaddle:

You're right, Kat, FairhavenGuy's playing cautious with any opinions.

Right now, I'm doing research into Emma's stay(s) in Fairhaven. From the Bristol Community College library, I just received a photocopy of Mr. Rebello's short July 2001 article, "Emma in Fairhaven" in the LB Quarterly. His map, by the way, seems to be the 1871 map, rather than the 1895 map, as stated. (1895's doesn't have Moses Delano's name on 19 Green Street, although he still lived there then.) It's a shame Mr. Rebello didn't include just a bit more of the map, because you'd see how close those two livery stables were.

I'll scan the map when I have a chance.

I'm checking a couple of things. One source seems to say that Fairhaven didn't have a telegraph office so the news would have to have arrived via New Bedford, yet a local history book notes that the telegraph in Fairhaven coincides with the construction of the railroad in 1854. The railroad terminal, just several blocks from 19 Green Street, almost certainly would have had a telegraph office in 1892. (For gosh sakes we had telephones in Fairhaven starting in 1880. . .)

Mr. Rebello emphatically states that Emma and Lizzie weren't related to the Brownells, but his sources were Borden, Delano and Brownell genealogies. There could still be a connection via Morses and female lines that are harder to trace.

As I uncover information that might be of interest, I'll post it.

If anyone has Fairhaven-related questions, feel free to ask. I'll see what I can find.

Thanks for that, Susan.  I don't know why I'm having trouble imagining Lizzie on horseback.  Is anyone else struggling with this image?

I think Emma would be a timid rider and Lizzie would take chances.
I can picture the girls riding.  I can picture Lizzie jumping!
I think of it as something she can control.

It sounds as if Morse came with a hired hack and they went for a drive.  That's what I said- at least that's what I meant.


I forgot about the sidesaddle!
Anyway, as the town developed and became more urban, that's what we picture in our minds.  But areas even in The Highlands were still considered farms- like The Brayton place with it's rooster.
Lizzie riding up the Hill might be more acceptable when she was young than walking around a place she didn't live?

(Message last edited Mar-13th-04  12:54 AM.)

I think you should save up your research and write an article for The Hatchet!

I'll think about that, but I'm a little busy at the moment. (Check updated profile. . .)

Thanks for the profile!
I Love profiles!

That picture is great! 
Your site is cool!