1. "What did the "girls" inherit?"
Posted by harry on Dec-9th-03 at 7:55 AM

One of the things I find interesting is that there is no listing of just what the Borden daughters inherited upon Andrew's death.  There's a lump sum evaluation but not the specifics that make up that total.

There are bits and pieces here and there but no formal list. I would have thought that there would have been traceable legal documents on some of the property filed either in courts or with the city of Fall River if for no other purpose than to prove legally that the daughters were now the new owners.

Perhaps such documents exist and no one has researched that aspect of the case.  I think they would be invaluable and also help explain the sources of the daughters' cash flow.

I take it they weren't required to give an inventory?
If no one is clamouring for one, then one is not needed.  That's usually the case when legatee's don't bicker.
Yea, how would we know if *Bridget Was Paid Off* if we don't have that inventory?

The girls needed a LOT of money in a short period of time.  Add Robinson's $25,000 and the $11,000(?) they paid for the house and that's $36,000.  Add to that whatever Jennings and Adams got and you are over $40,000.  That's about 10 percent of what they inherited.

I would just like to know what they liquidated to raise that kind of money. 

There was probably not any legal requirement to publish an inventory but there has to be some sort of paper trail filed with the courts or legal entities.  Maybe Fall River got rid of all those records as well.

Thats a good question, Harry.  How many rental properties did Andrew Borden have outside of the Ferry street house?  How many buildings or spaces did he have to rent out for businesses outside of the A.J. Borden building?  Then not to mention the stocks and bonds he probably owned that could possibly be cashed in for some quick cash.  It would be interesting to find out!  Especially when I think that Lizzie and Emma and Bridget were expected to live off the couple hundred dollars they got a year from Andrew and those costs of the lawyers, even for those days were astronomical! 

Good points Susan.  I'm also inclined to believe that the primary source of the money would have come from the sale of stocks and bonds inherited from Andrew.  Nothing formal would need to be on public record in that case.

I found the following in Rebello, page 135.  This appeared In February 1893:

"The [Fall River Daily] Globe reported on the existence of a list of financial holdings supposedly written by Abby or possibly dictated by Andrew Borden. The list reportedly contained some $80,000 worth of stock in the Troy Mill, the Merchants Mfg., and other local ventures. The [Fall River Daily]Globe implied that money was at some point discussed in the Borden home. The Fall River Evening News quickly responded the next day to the [Fall River Daily] Globe report. The 'memorandum was not of Mrs. Borden's holdings, but some of Mr. Borden's personal property, and Mrs. Borden died possessing none of the stocks referred to.' The [Fall River] Evening News reported that the list was written in 1891 and "That it is not improbable that Mr. Borden dictated this memorandum, that he intended to leave these stocks to his wife, that it certainly suggests that the money in question was discussed occasionally in the household is purest assumption. There is nothing to show, if we are rightfully informed, that Mr. Borden or his daughters had any knowledge that such a list was kept by Mrs. Borden ..."

That last sentence is a beaut!

That's the year of the robbery.  Maybe *they* were looking for an inventory!

I also wonder if Andrew had that safe then or got it after.

Hmmm, thats an idea, Kat.  As far as we know Andrew had no will and I'm sure the girls knew that.  They may have caught wind that Andrew was planning on leaving these stocks for Abby and wanted to know in what amounts.  Can't you picture both Emma and Lizzie rifling through that desk?


Thanks, Harry, as always you come up with really interesting stuff!  Yes, that last line is a beaut, poor Abby.  Do you think its possible that Lizzie and Emma inherited more than what was listed?  Stocks and bonds not listed making them far richer than was noted?  I would think that the properties would have to be listed as well as money in the bank, but everything else? 

That last line would seem to indicate that possibly Abby was secretly keeping a list of Andrew's assets.  If so, what does that say?  One of the main theories why Lizzie took a hatchet to Abby was that she thought Abby was trying to maneuver Andrew into leaving her the bulk of his holdings.

If Andrew was about to prepare a Will maybe Abby wanted to make sure all of his assets were included.  Maybe Abby distrusted the girls as much as they distrusted her when it came to dividing up the assets.

Correctly said. But the "proof" is the court of public opinion, just as they said she was guilty somehow. (Or like some opined about the "search for the real killers" in another thread.

The question is: what seems reasonable to most people given the way things work? IF Bridget showed up at trial wearing a fancy new dress, people would gossip "payoff" when it may be only a better paying job.
Do we have documentary proof that Bridget left for Ireland after the trial? Or she returned via Canada?

Could it be this sum includes monies paid under the table to the "incorruptible" judges? Do you think this happens nowadays?

I once read somewhere that organized crime pays off the local politicians, who overlook their behavior as long as they get paid.

I have heard this over & over, even lately, that Bridget made a trip back to Ireland- but no one gives a source, on purpose.

(Message last edited Dec-11th-03  9:31 PM.)

Many of the books written about the Borden Murders over the last 66 years have repeated this story. It was undoubtedly based on what people say. This is not necessary the truth based on eye witness to the act. But rumors are not often false, as anyone who worked in a corporation can claim. The rumor of a "downsizing" often beats the announced facts.

If they had an eyewitness, the many writers would say so. Agree?

I can't recall from memory, but didn't E Radin mention this at the end of his book? The question is: why did Bridget leave FR? Was she blacklisted by the ruling class? Was she tired of being asked about the murders? Didn't she say: "if I talked about the murders then that crazy man who killed Mrs Borden may come after me"?

The books say Bridget wore a new outfit when she testified at the trial. Because of her higher wages (?) at the Sheriff's? Or her payment to not contradict Lizzie (L said SHE was upstairs laughing when Andy returned, but other sources say Lizzie was reading in the kitchen - the coverup of the Real Killer). I don't think it would be out of character for Bridget to return to Ireland (shedding unwanted publicity) and use her dollars to buy a homestead for her poor parents. Didn't one book say she returned to Canada using an false name, then went out west? (Please check my memory, Kat.)

Oh Ray, you know a couple of times a year you quote me something which I don't know the source and then I go looking, find it mostly and we then go & do it again 6 months later, same quote.  One of us should be taking notes! 

(Message last edited Dec-14th-03  6:03 AM.)

why you sphinx of coldness you!!!

  Ohmigawd, I almost choked on my soda when I read that, Haulover!

i trust it was not fatal.  so long as you're coughing, you're fine.

Moral: Never eat or drink when reading Haulover's posts. 

(Just kidding, Haulover)

(Message last edited Dec-16th-03  10:55 PM.)

Oh, I should have learned from past errors, never eat nor drink whilst perusing this forum!  I invariably find something that makes me laugh and then I have a mess to clean up. 

It wasn't me!  it t'was Ray, I tell you!
slowlyheturnedstepbystepinchbyinchhecreaptupAND >>>>