1. "Change Of Mind?"
Posted by Kat on Nov-23rd-02 at 3:13 AM

I know that several of our members have written articles that have been published in the Lizzie Borden Quarterly over the years.
I would like to ask a burning question.
After reading these many issues several times over the last 2 years or so, I wondered if the opinions posed, or the research accomplished at the time still seems to their authors to stand up against the test of time.

I've read a high percentage of Proceedings, which was a direct result of the 100 year anniversary Conference held in Fall River...and after almost 10 years I have wondered if any author would want to change any speculations or theories.

So when I know there are contributors to the LBQ right here, I wanted to ask if any had or would change their theory, or scope of investigation, or if they felt confident that what they had created has stood the test of time?

This is kind of like an interview, I guess, where I would invite these authors to share if or what they might change in their work?  Or if it stands complete even unto now?  And has any new research been uncovered that might change someone's original conclusion from the last couple of years? 

Hi Kat,
I also have a burning question:  How can those of us who are new to this group obtain such things as the Proceedings (from the hundredth anniversary conference) and articles from the LBQ to which you are referring?  Thanks in advance for your help.

It may depend on how many books you read before you ventured an opinion. If you read only one, reading another and its point of view may change your viewpoint. Its best to read all the books in the order they were published. Most articles are based on either books or some newspaper. Nobody here was alive when any of the principals were still living; after 1930s.

Like the Medieval question "how many angels can fit on the head of a pin?" it depends on your knowledge of the books and facts, and the contrary views in them.

"If an angel occupies an infinitely small amount of space, and the head of a pin becomes an infinitely small space, how many angels can fit on the head of a pin. Use quotations from the Bible or other sacred texts to argue your view." WHAT an essay question!!!

Robert Harry, I don't have all the LBQ back issues, the ones left for sale are too expensive for me to buy. But maybe on this site library or resource section there are links to them, I have to check that out.
I did try to get back issues from the Interlibrary loan but no one who had copies were willing to share them.

In answer to Kat's question. I wrote an article for the LBQ and I have noticed three mistakes I made.  One was I said Emma was 42 and she was 41 at the time of the murders. One was I quoted I think Sullivan who himself misrepresented the trial testimony and said Bridget told that Lizzie had on a blue dress, etc. etc. when the testimony when you actually read it says she didn't know ( think she just wouldn't say). And the third mistake was I lumped two references together and they should have been separated.

Otherwise I wouldn't change what I said, it was fairly objective and I still believe gender did have a large bearing on the case verdict.

http://www.arborwood.com/awforums/show-topic-1.php?start=1&fid=27&taid=3&topid=339&ut=1027925660
Info From Second Street Second Hand Shop here on this Forum, as of April, 2002.

Also:
http://www.lizzieandrewborden.com/LBQ.htm
At the LABVM/L

Back issues are expensive (They were my idea, but I didn't know what they were Worth!)
Available from the Quarterly directly.

Vol. 1, No. 1---Not available
Vol. 1, No. 2 ---Not Available
Vol. 1, No. 3---$15
Vol. 1, No. 4 --$10
Remaining back issues --$8

To those of you that aren't fully familiar with the LBQ, Carol was the featured article in the Janurary 2000, issue, front page:  Vol. VII, Number 1, Lizzie In The Classroom

That was a generous answer Carol, as to *mistakes*.  I did wonder if *mistakes* bothered an author, but I figured some editing can also change an article or inadvertantly Cause a *mistake*.

I really am more interested in the overall theme or logic behind a theory...(But maybe you had always wanted to *set the record straight*?)

Anway, if we take your essay for example, there is one part, for instance where you say, "By Bowen's testimony Robinson was able to reinforce women's position in society, they were weaker and to be taken charge of.  Miss Russell and Mrs. Churchill both said Lizzie appeared calm and in control of herself when they got to the house, so it seems to have been a precaution that Dr. Bowen was taking because the general attitude of men was that women became hysterical easily.  It was another way to control women and make them ineffectual decision makers."
(Talking about Bowen's prescribing bromo caffeine and the morphine...and thusly Lizzie was muddled at the Inquest)
.
We had been discussing here the demeanor of Lizzie upon the first witnesses discovery of her at the screen door and a little bit later.  Was she agitated, and upset and crying, or was she calm and in control?
Was there something (non-specific maybe?) that influenced you to notice a change in how Lizzie was perceived upon discovery?  Would that change the thrust of the augument that Dr. Bowen gave her medicine pretty much to constrain or restrain her or contol her?

I do wonder, after re-reading your fine article, that  Lizzie had the brains to pull off this murderous event, because, as you propose, I agree that girls were not taught to make decisions, and were considered pretty assests and adjuncts to a man...so how could a girl raised in this envoirnment pull off the crime of the century which remains unsolved to this day? 

I do think your article does stand the test of time, though I might argue a bit with Andrew's depiction as scrooge and miserly...but I have been decrying that black-and white view of him since time began...
In the Proceedings book, I would think some people would be squirming by 2002, and also some of those who stated their opinions in the videos!
All except Mr. Michael Martins, of course!

(Message last edited Nov-24th-02  12:35 AM.)

Kat, you have whet my appetite, I want more!!!  Sounds like Carol's article is quite interesting, would love to see it in whole!  I guess I am missing out on much not getting the LBQ! 

Mr. Bertolet's introduction states that Carol took a class in U.S. Trials, and I believe this was a condensed version of the paper she wrote for that class.
She bought the MICRO-FILM copy of the trial to study it.
That's dedicated!
Anyway, she got an "A" and here I was arguing with her the finer points of The Judges decision  about allowing poison testimony at the TRIAL!  (I didn't realize this until after).
It's a good overview of the case and stresses that the time and place and gender prejudices are meaningful in understanding the case.
We have other LBQ authors here we all have gotten to know. 

Thanks for the feedback and reading my piece in the LBQ.  I wrote that just after studying the case for that term, I had no background otherwise. The LBQ reproduced the whole paper for the class in the magazine. I was stunned and amazed that it got accepted.  It does though, bother me that someone would read it and think Bridget knew what Lizzie was wearing, but that's what happens with the written and spoken word (which is captured on tape), it proves we aren't perfect and the reader has to re-check all things, no one is infallible. But this happens to anyone also who lets the case drop for awhile, we have to brush up again.

Lizzie was first observed as crying, (Bridget, Mrs. Churchill thought her agitated (looking out her kitchen window), Miss Russell made a similar comment and Sawyer thought she was also somewhat affected at first view but after the ladies got into the house and started fanning her, put her in a chair and calmed her down she seemed to remain so throughout the rest of the morning.

She wasn't just the cold fish the police said she was from start to finish.  So I think what I said was validated by the testimony. Dr. Bowen didn't give her the bromo caffeine (aspirin) until later Thursday and didn't change it to morphine until Friday. But he continued it all the next week, doubled dose. I don't think he did that because she then became a raving lunatic, or was imbalanced. I think it was a precaution HE was taking on her behalf, being chivalrous and also with the mindset that women can't handle such stresses without assistance. I don't think people get morphine today unless it is something serious. Of course, she did during that period, have her father and stepmother killed (whether she did it or not), became the prime suspect,was being grilled by the police, and was subject to appear at the inquest. Doctors are still doing this, giving women valium and all sort of medicines on which they are bombed out on half the time. My ultimate point was that I didn't think he would have given a man the same medicine in the same situation. 

That Dr. Bowen gave her morphine doesn't mean Lizzie needed it. And just because the men of the day thought women would get hysterical, didn't have brains and were unable to handle situations doesn't mean women bought into this. A woman could use that attitude to her advantage to a certain extent while existing in such a society. Knowlton was right in that women were not the physical equals to men but they are cunning, they had to be to survive with any degree of self-respect when the other half thinks of them as dimwits and possessions. If Bridget did it then one would have to look at her upbringing in Ireland and how that would have related to the social environment of New England too, but I didn't touch that.

As for the depiction of Andrew I relied on the prevailing source material. I am not sure now about the casket story, that seems like something I might have left out...but thinking of it another way, if Andrew could figure out a way of saving himself money on some sort of casket alteration for his clients then surely his daughter could figure out how to get Andrew into one of them herself.

My article wasn't trying to prove guilt or innocence, mainly bringing up some of my thoughts on how the social atmosphere of the time and gender attitudes related to the not-guilty verdict.

Thanks for responding and being so candid about your article.

I can see how the views of Lizzie at the time she was found, and her demeanor a little bit later could be perceived by different witnesses and described somewhat differently maybe according to their own shock, horror, and expectations of how she should be reacting.  Meaning there is room for all of the perceptions to be somewhat right, at some point.

I have a question for you or anyone who may know:
There is the fact that Bowen perscribed but do we actually KNOW that Lizzie TOOK these medicines?  I think Bowen is asked if he specifically SAW her take or be given his concoctions, and he only admitted to twice?

Dr. Bowen testified to the doses he had seen at the trial, page 329 on re-direct examination:

Q.  (By Mr. Moody.)   How many times did you personally see her take the medication?
A.  Not more than twice, I think.
Q.  When were those two times?
A.  Between one and two in the afternoon, of Thursday.
Q.  And that was bromo caffeine?
A.  Yes, sir.
Q.  Is bromo caffeine a medicine which has a tendency to create hallucinations a week or so after it has been taken?
A.  No, sir.

Regarding the morphine (page 328):

Q.  (By Mr. Adams.) Was she not arrested Thursday, the week following, that is a week from the day of the tragedy?
A.  I don't remember that.
Q.  I ask you about the morphine that you were giving her and you tell me on Friday you gave one-eighth of a grain, which is the ordinary dose, I understand, mild dose, and on Saturday you doubled it, you gave it, sent it, and she had it on Monday and Tuesday, and how long did she continue to have it?
A.  She continued to have that all the time she was in the station house.
Q.  After her arrest, was it not?
A.  And before.
Q. In other words she had it all the time up to the time of her arrest, the hearing and while in the station house?
A.  Yes, sir.
Q.  So that if before the arrest, she was one, two, or three days before the private inquest, she was there when she had been given for several days this double dose of morphine?
A.  Yes, sir.

It's not quite clear whether Bowen himself administered the doses.  I would assume that he did at least up until the time of her arrest.

I'm glad you found that...Thanks.

I'm not convinced that she TOOK it.
We don't have a witness to her Taking it.
I think Alice was charged with her care while she was at the house.
But I don't see Bowen running to Lizzie a few times a day to give her morphine.
I would think, if she actually TOOK it, that it was given her by the jail matron, who possibly had nursing abilities?
I'd still like to know more.
I wonder if there's more?

Adams doesn't press the issue (probably deliberately) as to how it was taken.  Notice how he says:

"...and on Saturday you doubled it, you gave it, sent it...."

Wouldn't a "grain" be given in the form of a pill?

I'm skating on pretty thin knowledgable ice here -- but a grain is really just a unit of measurement.  And l grain = 64.8 milligrams.  (Therefore, if Lizzie was taking 1/4 of a grain, she would have been taking 16.2 milligrams of morphine.)  There's a lot of sites that talk about morphine on the web ..  from administering it to victims during the Civil War right up to present day casualty situations.  It seems that morphine is/was most commonly administered in a solute and delivered by injection -- then and now.

The only experience I have had with morphine was with excruciating pain resulting from a kidney stone.

More than once it was given to me in emergency rooms, always by injection.  I have no idea the amount or strength of the doses. As you could well imagine it wasn't exactly my point of focus at the time.

I do know it was powerful and put me (thankfully) to sleep until the stone had a chance to move.  It did put me to sleep quickly.  The after effects were mild although I was a bit groggy for a few minutes but it wore off faster than I would have expected.

Of course this was more than a hundred years after Lizzie's doses and is probably not the same drug as it was given for a different reason.  I have never heard of it in pill form but I am no expert either. 

(Message last edited Nov-27th-02  5:41 PM.)

So if Dr. Bowen "sent" over an injection of morphine for Lizzie I find that peculiar in a day when there weren't disposable needles, or maybe it was common for doctors to send over vials of morphine with injectors, or even leave them with family members to administer over time.  That makes me think it might have been Emma who administered the doses, if indeed it was an injection.  If it was a pill, and it doesn't seem likely from what you all say, then either Lizzie gave it to herself and was left with a supply, Dr. Bowen saw her personally each time, or someone Lizzie trusted or was in authority to do so injected her.

Is there a doctor on this board who could help us out with the dosages of morphine in the Lizzie case and the period of time they were taken and whether they would induce strange behavior such as Lizzie is accused of displaying in her inquest testimony?

I word-searched the testimony of Dr. Bowen in the Inquest, Preliminary, and Trial.
The Trial has the only references to the prescribing and doseing of Lizzie, by Bowen.
I used words:  medicine, medication, bromo caffeine, Friday, morphine, grain, dose, doctoring and Alice or Russell.

The hit was Alice Russell, which begins the testimonial story of Bowen and the doses.
Emma was not home yet when this dosing of medication started, so it appears (following Dr. Bowen's words, Trial, 326) that Alice went over to his house Thurday afternoon, possibily with "word from Lizzie" (which is in Question form, not answer).
Bowen says he gave a preparation and left a second dose...this was on that second visit on Thursday after his noonish meal.  He "carried it over in a bottle, to be taken"..the bromo caffeine.

Friday night at bedtime he directed morphine to be taken. (T., 327)  Of course Emma is home by Thursday early evening, 5 or 6 p.m.

Remember, Harry, in the papers, it was noted that Bowen was called over to the Borden residence twice Friday night, and one hinted that Lizzie had taken poison?

Anyway, last night I checked Matron Reagan as to drugs in jail but there was no mention there.

--I find it odd, that at the Inquest (124) Bowen is asked about Lizzie and food as to Thursday.  He says he "accidently" found out that Alice had come over to Mrs. Dr. Bowen and got tea & toast supposedly for Lizzie.  What's odd is Lizzie seems now to be his patient but he shows such vague unconcern as to her eating habits while on his medicine!
But it does seem as if Alice took good care of Lizzie at least until Emma came home...but we don't know that she didn't continue any nursing duties as needed as her mother was a well-known nurse in the community.  (Rebello, 63)

(Message last edited Nov-27th-02  11:52 PM.)

Thanks for the digging Kat.  The drug information is really quite important.  The ONLY thing we have from Lizzie under oath is her inquest testimony.

If she was half stoned while testifying it can't be very well relied on either for or against her. 

She did get quite confused at least one time with her "...I don't even know your name" answer.  She may have been just worn out by then though as she was under a lot of pressure.

It seems to me just barely possible that Lizzie would LIKE to appear dazed or drugged but was clever enough to want to have her wits about her at the Inquest.
I wondered if the drugs/dosing was a ruse....like she poured it in the plant or something.
If you are testifying for your life would you want to be drugged?
Some may ask, that maybe she didn't know it was for her life or the importance of the Inquest, but I would say, at the least, Jennings would have...
...and Bowen seems so unconcerned...
I don't think doctors just leave the morphine on the nightstand and say goodnight?
If they do, May I have his name and #?

(Message last edited Nov-28th-02  12:21 AM.)

This from the Merck Manual:

Morphine: Intravenous or intramuscular.
Length of effectiveness: 2 to 3 hours; by mouth, 3 to 4 hours.

I feel certain Dr. Bowen administerd morphine tablets, not an injection with a hypodermic.
Who would be foolish enough to trust this lady with another sharp instrument?

Hi Bill!
Thanks for the info.
Do you think, then it also might be possible to administer it as a potable liquid?  Or even as a suppository?

(Message last edited Nov-29th-02  1:09 AM.)

http://www.pharmj.com/Editorial/20000909/clinical/morphine.html
Apparently I invented something here.
This is a "new" technique to deliver morphine, when orally is no longer viable.
Available, c. 2000.
But then, everything *old* is new again, right?
Like leeches and maggots, maybe this is a resurrected form of administration?
Anyway, Morphine is an opioid analgesic (378) so why the heck does Lizzie need that anyway?  Did she burn herself ironing hankies Thursday?

Thanks for the info Bill.  Whether it was available in that form in 1892 would be interesting to find out.  It may very well have been.

I also wonder why that if Lizzie took it so many straight days she did not develop an addiction.  I have no idea how long it takes to develop one or whether the doses were strong enough.  As I understand it they were just to calm her as she was in no pain.

OK, we've got to calm LIzzie.
She says she barely saw the blood on Andrew's face before rushing away from the siting room doorway.
Is that enough to cause her to collapse?
Why doesn't Emma *collapse*?
Or Bridget?
Bridget seems, by reports, more *excited* and seems like a more excitable person.
So is Bowen calming Lizzie because she is afriad?
Or because she is in grief?
OR shock?
Just because she was THERE and Emma wasn't?
Or because of her personality construct, as compared to Emma's?
To give a pain reliever is odd.  Makes me wonder if she was in pain.

For what it's worth -- here's something I found on the Internet.

"Physicians in the nineteenth century as now prescribed opiates for pain. They were also widely prescribed, however, for cough, diarrhea, dysentery, and a host of other illnesses. Physicians often referred to opium or morphine as "G.O.M."--- "God's own medicine." Dr. H. H. Kane's 1880 textbook, entitled The Hypodermic Injection of Morphia, Its History, Advantages, and Dangers, Based on Experience of 360 Physicians, listed 54 diseases which benefited from morphine injections. They ranged from anemia and angina pectoris through diabetes, insanity, nymphomania, and ovarian neuralgia, to tetanus, vaginismus, and vomiting of pregnancy. 1 To modern readers, this list may appear to be evidence of the incompetence of nineteenth-century physicians. Yet, for the great majority of these conditions, morphine really was of help--- especially in the absence of more specific modern remedies (such as insulin for diabetes). For morphine ...  can be highly effective in calming--- tranquilizing. [Emphasis mine] The nineteenth-century physician used morphine for a wide range of disorders much as the physician today uses meprobamate (Miltown, Equanil), chlordiazepoxide (Librium), and other tranquilizers and sedatives now in style. The effects are quite different in several respects but the calming or tranquilizing effect is achieved by both groups of drugs."

This is from an article on Licit and Illict Drugs in Consumer's Union Report (1972) by Edward M. Brecher and the Editors of Consumer Reports Magazine.

Wow, great find Diana.  It looks like old Doc Bowen was right on target.

Now we got to locate something that says Lizzie took or was given the doses during this period.  If left to herself I doubt she would have taken them.

That was really good, Diana.
Now I'm confused as to injection or not.  Of course the Legend movie has her injected by Emma, and I keep seeing that in my memory.
We had talked about this somewhat in August, on the thread "What did Lizzie eat?"
Some notes:

--Apparently after being arrested Thursday, Aug. 11,  she was held in the local jail and then moved to Taunton Friday, arraigned, then jailed in Taunton.  (Rebello, 156)

-- In the Sourcebook [of news articles] pg. 120, there is a quote from Matron  Wright, of the Taunton jail:
"Miss Borden is remarkably calm and self-contained, even cheerful;  today I allowed her to walk in the corridor after her sister came.  They walked up and down for some time, talking, even conversing with one of the prisoners, who told her story, and for whom they expressed their sympathy.  Miss Borden, despite her calm, did not sleep at all Friday night nor eat anything from the time she entered until noon Saturday;  then she and her sister dined together, a nice dinner being sent over from the hotel, where we ordered it at their request."

--Anyway, though there's not a date, the partial transcription above, and below, was probably from The Fall River Herald, and deduce the date as around Sunday, Aug. 14th, by the articles around this one.

"...The prisoners at Taunton jail are required to arise at 6 o'clock.  Their breakfast of fish hash, bread and coffee is served at 7.  On Sunday a dinner of meat, a few vegatables and water is served after 1 o'clock.  Lizzie arose with the others at 6 o'clock and made her own bed.  She had slept brokenly, but was still refreshed.  She drank a cup of coffee and a mere bite of bread, but wanted nothing more until noon.A little after that hour an expressman brought a dinner from the bill of fare of the City hotel, some blocks away, made up of tempting dishes.  Of this she partook quite heartily.  She is reported not to have suffered a return of the nausea, which overtook her on the day of her arrest, and of which she stands in dread.  She maintains that poise that has been the wonder of all since this tragedy and its mystery has turned so many eyes upon her."

----The article implies that Lizzie was afraid the attack would recur...
Maybe she was going through withdrawl?
If she WAS, then it would seem evident that she may actually have been drugged during her Inquest, but somehow I just can't see Jennings allowing that.  (?)





(Message last edited Dec-1st-02  2:45 AM.)

I just noticed one of the afflictions it benefitted was "nymphomania". Now why would they want to cure that? 

Harry, I'm been curious as to why you feel Lizzie wouldn't have been taking the morphine.  Certainly Bowen's trial testimony indicates that she was provided with enough of it:

"Q.  I ask you about the morphine that you were giving her and you tell me on Friday you gave one-eighth of a grain, which is the ordinary dose, I understand, mild dose, and on Saturday you doubled it, you gave it, sent it, and she had it on Monday and Tuesday, and how long did she continue to have that?
A.  She continued to have that all the time she was in the station house.

Q.  After her arrest, was it not?
A.  And before.

Q. In other words she had it all the time up to the time of her arrest, the hearing and while in the station house?
A.  Yes, sir.

Q.  So that if before the arrest, she was one, two, or three days before the private inquest, she was there when she had been given for several days this double dose of morphine?
A.  Yes, sir.

Q.  I suppose physicians well understand the effect of morphine

Page 329 / i349

on the mind and on the recollection, don't they?
A.  Supposed to, yes, sir.

Q.  Is there any question about it?
A.  No, sir.

Q.  Do you know whether she had ever had occasion before to have morphine prescribed for her, as far as you know?
A.  I don't remember that she had.

Q.  Does not morphine given in double doses to allay mental distress and nervous excitement somewhat effect the memory and change and alter the view of things and give people hallucinations?
A.  Yes, sir.

Q.  There is no doubt about it, is there?
A.  No, sir." (Bowen, trial testimony)

So I guess my question is, if Lizzie wasn't taking the morphine, why did Bowen keep replenishing her supply? 

When I've been working on theories, I've never put too much stock in Lizzie's inquest testimony; because I did feel that she could have been suffering from a drug-induced state of confusion as well as a combination of post-traumatic stress (this, whether she committed the crimes or not). 

I've been reading up on Morphine, apparently Morphine is only given intravenously for severe post-operative pain or emergency situations.  The preferred method is an oral dose of 8 to 20 mg every four hours, depending on the severity of the pain.  And your dosage must be upped after a few days as you will tend to build up a tolerance to it.  Which Dr. Bowen did do, he doubled Lizzie's dosage, but, it was the following day.  I also found out that there is a street trade in the drug!  It goes by the names; "M", morph, or my personal favorite, Miss Emma!!!

Analgesically effective blood levels of Morphine may cause nausea and vomiting directly by stimulating the chemoreceptor trigger zone, but nausea and vomiting are significantly more common in ambulatory than in recumbent patients.  Lizzie was ambulatory and vomited in prison, she may have still been taking the Morphine, or had taken and then stopped.                                                                  Stopping of Morphine abruptly will produce withdrawal symptoms shortly before the time of next dose, reaching a peak at 36 to 72 hours after the last dose, and then slowly subside over a period of 7 to 10 days!  Symptoms include yawning, sweating, lacrimation (secretion of tears), rhinorrhea (? Excessive nose running-my guess), restless sleep (which Lizzie had her first night in prison), dilated pupils, gooseflesh, irritability, tremor, nausea, vomiting(which we know Lizzie did do), and diarrhea.

So, it sounds from her symptoms that Lizzie did indeed take her Morphine, and it sounds as though Dr. Bowen cut her off.  From his trial testimony:

Q. I ask you about the Morphine that you were giving her and you tell me on Friday you gave one-eighth of a grain, which is the ordinary dose, I understand, mild dose, and on Saturday you doubled it, you gave it, sent it, and she had it on Monday and Tuesday, and how long did she continue to have it?
A. She continued to have that all the time she was in the station house.

Q. After her arrest, was it not?
A. And before.

Q. In other words she had it all the time up to the time of her arrest, the hearing and while in the station house?
A. Yes, sir.

Q. So that before the arrest, she was one, two, or three days before the private inquest, she was there when she had been given for several days this double dose of Morphine?
A. Yes, sir.      

On that same page (329) on re-direct by Moody:

Q.  (By Mr. Moody.)   How many times did you personally see her take the medication?
A.  Not more than twice, I think.
Q.  When were those two times?
A.  Between one and two in the afternoon, of Thursday.
Q.  And that was bromo caffeine?
A.  Yes, sir.
Q.  Is bromo caffeine a medicine which has a tendency to create hallucinations a week or so after it has been taken?
A.  No, sir.

There isn't any question in my mind whether Bowen provided the morphine to Lizzie but a question as to whether if left to her own choice she would take it. It would seem to me that if Bowen administered the morphine he would say so.  He doesn't in the above trial testimony. It would have been a big feather in Lizzie's cap if he had.

I think that if Lizzie was the killer the last thing she would want is a clouded mind.  Her inquest testimony, even with it's conflicts, does show an attempt to counter the prosecution's questions. She modifies her testimony several times to adjust to the situation.  That's hardly possible if you are not in possession of your faculties.

Maybe she took a lesser dose than prescribed. Maybe she didn't take it all the times she was supposed to.  Maybe she took it only when she felt the need. There are all kinds of possibilities.  I just am not sure.

I know.  That's one of my favorite parts.  Where Adams asks a series of questions about morphine and then Moody immediately refers Bowen back to the bromo caffeine -- the much more benign medication that does not produce confusion or hallucinatory effects.  I think that's a prosecutorial ploy to attempt to show that Lizzie was of clear mind during the inquest and therefore capable of dissembling and twisting the truth.

This questioning of Dr. Bowen happened on June 8 -- prior to the June 12 arguments and decision as to the exclusion of Lizzie's testimony.  So I think both sides were working their own agenda here in case this testimony was admitted. The defense was stressing how many days Bowen sent morphine to Lizzie  -- while the prosecution was focusing on the harmless meds administered by Bowen on the day of the murder.

And I do see the following testimony -- albeit in answer to a rather garbled question by Adams -- as meaning that, in Bowen's opinion at least, Lizzie was taking the morphine he was prescribing.

"Q.  So that if before the arrest, she was one, two, or three days before the private inquest, she was there when she had been given for several days this double dose of morphine?
A.  Yes, sir." (Bowen,Trial)


But I agree with you, Harry, that this is probably another of those points that we can never really be sure about.

I see I will have to read Lizzie's testimony again from your perspective and see how all those contradictions play out when I don't view them as a resulting from a combination of residual shock and the effects of morphine.










 

The odd thing about the prescribing by Dr. Bowen is it is not referred to in the Witness Statements, at the Inquest, or Preliminary,  & we don't know about the grand jury, but it's NOT until the trial, almost a year later that it comes out.
So maybe Bowen made it up. Maybe it didn't happen.
He might do that for Lizzie.
We don't have anyone else saying she was drugged other than Bowen.
There is a news article about Bowen being called to the Borden house Friday night, and then we have the matron Wright's info on Lizzie's health in jail.
If anyone can find another reference then we may be back in business.

(Message last edited Dec-2nd-02  1:20 AM.)

I think Lizzie needed calming down for this reason: she realized that if she stayed in the house downstairs, she would have been the 3rd victim!!! And poor, poor Bridget might have been railroaded for the crime (like that poor Portuguese for Bertha Manchester!!!).

Incidentally, the above story confirms AR Brown's tale of official chicanery. Remember that scene in "The Maltese Falcon"? "We have to get a fall guy for the murders, and Wilmer is perfect since he did them." Or did he?

Since the morphine may have first been given Friday night, I figured she was extra upset over the funeral coming up the next morning.  People traipsing in and out of the house, too.

--Lizzie did stay in the house AFTER the body was found.  If she was so scared, why didn't she wait outside At Least?

BTW:  Alice mentions she had a newspaper in her room, Thursday night.  Just thought you-all would find that interesting.

TRIAL
Alice Russell
Pg. 390

Q.  What were you doing---that will measure the time, perhaps as well as anything else ---what were you doing while the doors were closed between the rooms?
A.  I was getting ready for bed.  I read an account of this affair in the News.

Do we know exactly which newspaper account of the affair that Alice read that night?  That would be very interesting! 

Did anyone research if Lizzie ever had an earlier prescription that she could have used up? Morphine was a common ingredient in many, many patent medicines of the day. One use was to combat diarrhea from summer flu or bad food, then or now.

Well, if we consider Dr. Bowen to be the Borden family physician, which he claims he was, then he does specify in testimony that he had not before prescribed that for Lizzie.
Trial
Bowen
329
Q.  Do you know whether she had ever had occasion before to have morphine prescribed for her, as far as you know?
A.  I don't remember that she had.

He does NOT specify he never prescribed it before; he says he doesn't remember. A good safe answer if you don't want to admit something, or really don't remember.
"Not to my recollection at this time" is the usual formula. Another formula is to start by saying "I don't believe" that smoking causes cancer etc. like those tobacco chiefs a few years ago.

I do agree that his answer was vague. I think it was possibly a way of avoiding the question. Or deferring the naswer in a way that wasn't lying or incriminating. Why though would that make a big deal? Would that mean the side effects might not have been as potent. And what would that matter if she wasn't on Morphine at the time of the murders anyways.
   RedFern

Well you asked a question...I found you an answer...what were you getting at?

But wasn't the sympathy of her class mostly in Lizzie's favor? So said Victoria Lincoln? Only after the verdict did it change.

Can't you see the family doctor today comforting a young woman whose parents were just killed or murdered? Nobody at the time thought she did it, only after the police were stumped (investigated 43 men?).

[I wondered if she was in the habit of taking any medicine. Note that many patent medicines had morphine or cocaine or other chemicals in them. Some of them harmful if taken regularly. There was no record of their sales.]





(Message last edited Dec-5th-02  12:52 PM.)

I wondered the same thing.  It was a theory of mine (and maybe you wondered too?) as to Lizzie's demeanor after the crime and also might explain IF she did it.
Drug induced frenzy?
Hooked on cocaine in Coca-cola?
Drugs that could be Mail-ordered, for gosh sakes!

I didn't think that anyone would take it as far as me, though, in my *supposings*, so I'm pretty sure you didn't mean what I am now referring to.

Go ahead and do all the supposings you can think of. It gives others perspective, and aside from the facts we know as of now, that's all we have to go on anymore. I think some are a bit wild and out there, but still leaves ya thinking!
  RedFern

Thanks.
Sometimes Stef has a lot of extra time to listen to my *supposings* and either adds or subtracts from them.  As a team we are pretty good at this stuff all the way down the line.
BUT this drug theory of mine just doesn't take off with her.  She doesn't see it.
I had kicked it around with Joe when Harry posted a picture of the Chinese Laundry up the street from #92.
Apparently some of these places were dens of opium smokers and it wasn't exactly illegal.

If he gave her injections I think he must have done it himself. It just doesn't seem realistic that a doctor would leave vials of morphine around at patients houses, especially Lizzie's since he was right across the street.

Since there were pills available in 1892 then I don't see any reason to believe morphine tablets weren't available. The medical book I checked says morphine can be given by injection, tablet or suppository, but that is today. 

Interesting that most of the material says morphine is given mainly for physical pain, but the book someone here quoted says that in the 1800s it was also a standard given to tranquilize or calm.  That makes sense. I don't think that Bowen made it up just for the trial testimony that he gave Lizzie morphine. If he knew the effects, which he did, of taking Lizzie off this medication cold turkey, he wasn't much of a doctor if he cut her off, was he? That's hard to believe.

Even if Bowen knew the effects of morphine I don't think he had any control over the police requiring Lizzie to testify at the inquest while he was treating his patient in such a way. Wouldn't it seem questionable in those days for a doctor to deny what he deemed necessary for his patient's welfare just because the police had an inquest?  Today things are different, witnesses testify while on medication and that is brought in as part of the record. 

It might also be that Bower objected to her testifying for the reason of halluninatory effects of morphine, confusion on her part, etc., and told Jennings that, and Jennings in turn did not want her to testify because of that, and he did tell the court he wanted to be present with her, and if that had happened her answers might have appeared more consistent.

Some years back, I counted the number of questions Lizzie answered at the Inquest.  When I reached eight hundred, I stopped counting.
With that many questions, I'm surprised she did so well. Even if she wasn't taking drugs, that's an awful lot of questions to answer.

When I was a lad of fifteen tender years, I testified at a trial.  I was on the stand for only fifteen minutes, but that lawyer tied me into knots - and I wasn't "on" anything!  I can sympathize with poor Lizzie!

Lets say Lizzie never took a drug in her life.
Then let's say Bowen put her on morphine and she was loaded while testifying at the Inquest.
If she had no drug experience, HOW would she have gotten through 800 questions, high?

We also don't know when exactly he cut her off.
He wasn't very interested in her eating habits while first medicated Thursday, with the "bromo-caffeine".

I sure would like to know something definite about this phase of the early testimonies...

To answer some of the preceding comments. I am not an MD. But a solution of morphine is still (?) an antidote for diarrhea. Could there have been patent medicines available then? Nobody paid any attention to? Note that they had food poisoning; its not just from one end. Lizzie didn't eat that morning; would morphine suppress the appetite?
Just questions on this topic that no one mentioned in the record.

If Thursday is referred to, Bridget said Lizzie had a coffee and Cookie(s?).
That was before the murders and medication.
Are you guessing that Lizzie had taken *patent* medicines normally throughout her life and therefore might be more resistent than someone who never has taken anything?

Morphine concoctions would probably need a prescription or a doctor's order, wouldn't it?
Bowen didn't treat their sickness....merely made suggestions.

(Message last edited Dec-8th-02  12:55 AM.)

To my knowledge (not an historian or MD), you did not need a prescription prior to the Federal 1914 law. There was a famous writer from Oakland Calif who effectively poisoned himself from taking drugs for his condition (pains?). Jack London, of course.

It's interesting that you counted the questions and they were over eight hundred. I would imagine that morphine given to a person over a period of days who had never had it before would be an influence on mental and physical health as opposed to someone for whom it was given regularly. If Dr. Bowen was her lifetime physician and he said he didn't remember her having it before, I would tend to believe this as I can't figure out a reason for him to lie.  He could have worded his answer in this way to cover for the fact some other physician, maybe when she was in Europe, could have administered her some sort of medication without his knowledge. 

I think Lizzie's inquest testimony shows she was at odds with Knowlton which shows she retained the ability to get upset, and that the morphine she was taking then did not restrain this reaction in her, i.e., make her so calm that she just didn't react to his bullying. I am limited in what I can say about the reactions of anyone to morphine because I have never had it and am not a doctor who is familiar with the many different possible reactions to the drug, especially in the 1892 period. But it is possible that in Lizzie the morphine reacted on her system so as to confuse her alignment of dates, times and situations during that emotional period but didn't affect her ability to remember in other ways.

But, I recently watched the case on Court TV, of the Fred Neulander murder trial, he was accused of hiring two hit men to kill his wife.  He was convicted but only after two trials. I watched the change in one of the hit men on the stand in the first to second trial. In the first trial this hit man (who was mentally slow to begin with) testified and did not make as coherent showing, not only in his choice of words and attentiveness but also in his alertness on the stand, as he did in the second trial, when he was on medication.  So here is the situation in reverse, medication altered the man's mental state so that he was able to present a better picture. It probably wasn't morphine he was taking, but it goes to show the variety of reactions people can have to drugs.

I do know of one person who morphine was used on. They were on a rather high dose though. It pratically knocked them out shortly afterwards. When the doctor was asked, yes morphine at any dose has a drozing effect....
   RedFern

A tincture of morphine was still prescribed in the 1970s for diarrhea when no other cause was present. Is it still used for Crohn's disease?

I found some information on morphine I'll pass on below.  I might have to change my mind as it might have been injections Bowen gave or left for Lizzie to take. It was prescribed and taken much oftener than I thought and the doctors didn't need to keep any records. There was lots of opium in patent medicines too.  Also interesting regarding Lizzie's testimony is that many writers were addicted to laudanum and morphine and yet wrote moving novels and had the ability to sound coherent while on the drugs. So that might explain Lizzie's shall we say somewhat "vivid" testimony.

"In the Arms of Morpheus, the Tragic History of Laudanum, Morphine & Patent Medicines," by Barbara Hodgson, 2001

The following comments are from the book named above:

The principal alkaloid (active ingredient) of opium is morphine.  There are 2 dozen alkaloids.  Morphine is present in all opium regardless of where it has been grown or how processed. 

Without morphine opium's effectiveness and addictiveness would be nearly non existent.

Morphine in its isolated form is a white crystallized salt that can be dissolved or melted for use in medicines that are swallowed or injected.

Morphine was not isolated or identified until the first decade of the 1800s.

All opium medicines, whether from opium or refined morphine are used against pain, coughing or diarrhea.

Morphine inhibits pain and produces calm by attaching itself to receptors on certain nerve cells in the brain, which receptors are already producing endorphins (homemade pain relievers).

With morphine injections l00% morphine is introducced into the body and travels directly to the brain with no dilution along the way.

Laudanum: there are several ways it was distilled:
a pill:
made with opium, saffron, castor, ambergris, musk and nutmeg
made with opium, licorice, terebinth, camphor, saffron
made with opium, honey, licorice, benzoic acid, camphor, anise, alcohol
there were probably many such combinations

Morphine and laudanum were used by many artist types, writers, etc. in France and Britain.  Many were addicted.

Laudanum was commonly given to quiet babies in the 1800s

prior to the 1850s and to the end of the century fragile constitution, invalidism, etc., was fashionable and convenient way for women to avoid the drugery of their lives. "Doctors taking advantage of the female mania for ill health loaded them down with medicines."

After the 1850's bored and restless women started using it more

Elizabeth Barrett Browning, 1806-1861 took laudanum and morphine for chronic pain from a spinal injury, fainting and an erratic heartbeat. "Her writing especially the descriptions of the senses was imaginative and vivid and possibly reflected the use of opium on her."

Louisa May Alcott was a morphine addict.

There is no evidence that addicts were suicide prone, but speaking of suicide (page 72) "Laudanum was a handy and presumably painless way to go."  In a study in the 1860s of 60 successful suicides, 46 were by laudanum.

French and British novels used opium as a plot device for suicide and murder.

Laudanum was easy to purchase.

Morphine:
addictions were called morphinomanie
addicts were called morphinomaniacs

in 1805 Friedrich W. Serturner, a German pharmacologist student isolated a crystalline salt from opium and named it morphine after the Morpheus, the "God of Dreams"

Commercial manufacture began in the 1820s in Britain, and 1830 in the USA

The hypodermic needle was created in England by Alexander Wo0d around
1853 and after that morphine injections caught on

Doctors thought addiction to morphine and opium came from swallowing the drugs and since injections bypassed the digestive system, by injecting it people wouldn't be addicted, they were wrong.

A whole society of women addicts, society women, carried their morphine kits, silver cases designed as cigarette cases and flasks, complete with syringe, needles and vials so they could get injections where ever they were. 

By 1900 the people who took morphine and opium knew of the risks

All classes were affected

Women got opium and morphine from doctors and pharmacists

The Harrison Act of 1914 was the first law to require doctors to pay taxes and keep records of what was prescribed or dispensed. 

In the late l800s opium was readily available in patent cheap medicines, easy to obtain.  The author found 300 patent medicines with opium in them.  With the new laws they steadily declined.   

Thanks --that was perfect info we did need even if just in study of the time period...that gives a good overview.
As to the case, I suppose there are people who, just as now, would not think to take any medicines at all for any reason, or at least who rarely did.
Finding out if any of our Borden's fit this catagorey would be hard.
I wonder if Andrew was such a one...

Very informative post, Carol.  Thank you.  As Kat was saying, now I too wonder if any of the Borden clan was inclined to take any of these patent medicines of the time?  Was aspirin available to Victorians?  If not, I would think that there would be some sort of household medicine for headaches and the like, probably something with morphine in it. 

Paregoric, a camphorated opium solution was available in the 18th century. Until recently it could be obtained without a prescription.

I recall that my Mom kept a small bottle in the medicine chest for toothaches. It was rubbed on the gum to ease the pain; tasted like licorice.

Thanks, William.  So, no aspirin?  Wow, sounds like we have it good with the variety of pain medications on the market nowadays, unless of course, you like walking around half loopy on opium or morphine? 

I remember Paragoric!
And I remember we always had a nice sized bottle of that in the medicine closet.  That was good for a lot of things!
I always slept really well after a nice dose of that.
I never knew until I was in my 20's that it was opium-based.  About 1980, it seems, it was removed from the market--or at least that's about the time our ongoing bottle was empty.
That was a shock!
It was so very versatile I couldn't understand why it would no longer be available.

"Since its market introduction under the trademark Aspirin® in the year 1899, acetylsalicylic acid has attained a leading position world-wide in the prescription-free therapy of painful, inflammatory and feverish states. The substance's tolerability and special pharmacological traits allow for an easy controlling of therapy."  
http://www.aspirin.com/index_en.html
 

So, my guess that the Bordens probably had a bottle of Paragoric or one of the other opium based patent medicines sounds like it might be on target.  No aspirin until 1899, yet, I remember reading that it comes from Willow tree bark and its a Native American cure.  Wonder why it took so long for the rest of us to find out?  Thanks, Kat! 

Yes,Kat, but paregoric will not produce a hole in your stomach lining.Of course, it does have some side effects. (Is that a giant lobster sitting on your knee)?

Yes, I have a bottle of white willow tree bark in my medicine cabinet. The herbal equivalent to asprin.(Herbal family here)
   RedFern

Redfern, is it as tough on your stomach as regular aspirin?  I personally don't have a problem with it myself, but, some people can't take it.  Is it in bark form, liquid, etc.? 

Maybe they had a bottle of it but the fact Abby went over to see Dr. Bowen Wed. morning might mean if she or anyone took it it didn't have any affect on their problems.  Also, Andrew's purported remark that his money wouldn't pay for Dr. Bowen's visit might mean they didn't need a physician often so what they had in the house were the over the counter stock others could also obtain, or it could mean that Andrew didn't invest in any of that either because he didn't want to spend on something not needed at the moment.  Hard  to read what the Borden medicine chest, if they had one, would have in it.  Bridget probably had her own choices in her trunk if any. Also, was thinking that if Andrew was wary of alcohol and tobacco he might also have been wary of patent medicines, etc. and it was only after his death that Lizzie had ever been given morphine, i.e., because he wasn't there to stop the administration of it.

Abby took castor oil with port wine, and Andrew was given Garfield Tea.  (Whatever that is)
When Morse was asked about Wednesday's visit to the farm solo, he said he had asked Andrew to join him, and that Andrew declined because he had been sick.  Morse was asked what that meant to him, what he inferred from that, and Morse says he thought maybe Andrew had had a "Physic".  Is that like an  oral enema?

Yes that's exactly what it is.  My mother who was a nurse and died in 1997 (in her eighties) always called laxatives "physics." (taken orally)

I remember I had posted something on Garfield Tea awhile ago and found it again, also on Castor Oil, lets hope the link works!

http://www.arborwood.com/awforums/show-topic-1.php?start=1&fid=27&taid=1&topid=612#9

From what I see, they are both laxatives of sorts.  I guess the idea was to flush (no pun intended) the cholera morbeus germ right out of your system. 

Thanks you guys!
Well if Andrew was taking oral laxatives Wednesday, he'd be interested in staying near the "necessary", but we think he usually used the one in the back of the barn.

AFTER a day or two of THAT, maybe a hatchet could be disposed of in there in August.  What cop wouldn't say he searched it under orders, while in the meantime thinking..."They don't PAY me enough to look THERE..."

Also, Andrew was probably weakened by loss of elecrolytes, dehydration.  He may have gotten dizzy or woozy from that.  Needing to rest on the couch, you see...

If, and we are not sure, Andrew was taking laxatives Wed. this problem must not have been tied to the one which made him vomit during the night. By Thursday morning he must have been well because he had a big breakfast and then went downstreet. No one reported him dodging into bathrooms on the trip so he must have felt well enough then. I wonder why he would have needed a laxative with what they were eating that week?

Inquest
Morse
101
Q.  That would not warm over for breakfast then?
A.  I could not tell what they had.

Q.  Did they have some kind of meat?
A.  I think some kind.

Q.  Do you remember whether they had some sort of  fruit, apples, pears, or bananas?
A.  There was bananas on the table.

Q.  Further than that, you cannot remember?
A.  No Sir.

Q.  Did they all eat pretty heartily?
A.  Not very.
---------------------
Prelim.
Hart
203+
Q.  Did you see him on the morning of the day he was found dead?
A.  I did.
.................
Q.  Did he appear to be in health?
A.  I had a fancy he did not look well, if it is allowable, I might state what he said.
(Mr. Jennings.)  I have no objection.
A.  The day before there was a quarterly meeting of the Trustees at which he being President would undoubtedly have been present were it not for some good and important reason. When he came in he said he was not present yesterday because he was not well.
Q.  You say you did not think he looked well that day?
A.  No sir, well I just had that fancy, that he did not look strong.

--Do you have the Preliminary Hearing or access to it?




(Message last edited Dec-21st-02  5:08 PM.)

While being observed by Hart as not "looking well" at the bank, Andrew certainly felt well enough to have gotten up, dressed, eaten and walked downstreet on a very hot morning after being sick the day before to such an extent as to have missed his business meeting.  If he was really sick he wouldn't have gone out of the house, especially having just taken a laxative.

He may not have eaten with gusto, i.e., "heartily," according to Uncle John who we all know was an exceptionally perceptive man, who in the same testimony said he could not remember what they had, but he felt well enough to eat that morning and the autopsy showed he was a well nourished male.

I believe the phrase "well nourished" is a code word to say "the subject did not starve to death". Any medical dictionary handy?