1. "Ferry Street House"
Posted by augusta on Jul-13th-02 at 7:50 PM

Here is a picture of the house that caused so much trouble between Abby and the 'girls'.  I'd never seen it before, and here it's been right on my shelf in Porter's "Tragedy..." all this time.

Great minds...I too was looking at Porter today and noticed the picture of the Ferry Street house.  It bears at least a superficial resemblance to "the" Borden homestead, with some features reversed.
Did you notice the picture of Charles Sawyer?  He didn't look the way I expected him to either.

That's a neat coincidence, Edisto.  I thought it WAS the Borden house at first.  I had to look at both houses to be sure.  That Ferry Street house looks pretty substantial.  I always pictured some dumpy little cottage. 

This spurred me on to seeing if the house is still standing.  Sadly, it is not.  According to Rebello's book, people lived in it until 1959 and it was torn down.

I agree.  Sawyer's picture is a surprise.  You gotta see Officer Allen.  I tried to scan it out of Porter's book but it just comes out black. 

Here is the picture in Porter of the much abused Officer Allen.

Thanks, Harry.  I don't know how you did it and I don't know why I couldn't.  It's neat to have the real face or the real building go with what we've read so much about.

I remember that house and thinking it looked similar in style to Andrew's house.

Stef was trying to figure out a photo of some nuns marshalling a group of schoolgirls down the street, and they passed in front of a house that looked just like the Borden house.  I (remembering the Ferry st. similarity) said, "Couldn't that be any house in the near area?  If Southard Miller was a builder maybe he built the same house over & over...it could be ANY house..."  Well it turns out, after comparing the two, #92 with THIS house, she found that the front door was not recessed like the Borden's.  Odd, the determination hung on that Front Door (again it comes up!).

We always read of the "tenement" houses, and the multiple family houses in Fall River, so WHY would the living arrangements of the Borden family seem so odd to reporters?  I'm beginning to view them as not only NOT ODD, but maybe more the norm!  If they lived in Second Street as if they were 2 families, they would have seperate Front Doors, seperate meal times, seperate vacation schedules etc.  I think the papers blew this family lifestyle out of all proportion.

Some Authors exaggerated this view by actually promoting the idea in their stories that the murders happened BECAUSE of this "Odd Arrangement" of the house...no hallways, etc.  People bumping into people, locking doors for privacy's sake...
I no longer think this is "odd".  I think the sensationalist press (from N.Y.--from Boston--What, they didn't have these duplex type housing THERE?  Sure...) have made it out to be odd.

Has anyone here that stayed at #92 felt like it would have been a strange way to live...in that house...with independent adult daughters? 

I haven't slept in the house (and won't!) but I've been in it.  And I never really appreciated the strangeness of the house until I saw it in person.  Doors opening directly into another room.  No halls.  It's weird.  I don't know that all duplexes were built like that.

But Andrew made some changes so that it would no longer be a 2-family dwelling, but a one-family home.  The dining room downstairs used to be two bedrooms, for one thing. 

The thing is, they were not two families.  They were one.  They had one servant who it seemed made 3 meals at certain times.  The closeness inside that house makes the situation all the more strange when you think that there was discord between the girls and Abby.  It had to be pretty tough to live in there and ignore someone - or have a dislike for someone.

It sounds like that particular duplex was built like it was to save money on the building materials instead of it being the style.  It felt like something out of Alice in Wonderland - it just wasn't right - it didn't feel comfortable or good.  I think Andrew bought it because it was probably cheap and it was near to town. It isn't the 'girls' fault that they lived in that house.  They probably hated it with a passion, even if their father wasn't wealthy, but worse yet knowing that he could afford something more liveable.  I think the house itself caused friction between them all.

Did Andrew make any changes that took out a hallway?   

Has anyone had adult "children" living with them?
It does tend to become 2 families.
It may not be the best situation to *split* like that, but adults have different lives and different schedules.
I was speaking to my sister-in-law this evening.
Their 23 year old son is living at home in a slightly seperate area they had built for him over the garage.  He is old enough for a girlfriend and she stays over sometimes.  When she is there, their son is no longer part of the family.  It's as if he was his Own Family.  They don't see him and he keeps his own hours.
They share the maid and the kitchen....
That illustrates the seperate adult children factor I'm describing.  It may not be right...it may not be healthful for emotional reasons...but I think the Borden family figured out a way to live that suited the circumstances at the time.

The feelings you had when visiting there were obviously real and tangible.  I wonder if others had similar reactions , like some reporters, and they wrote from that instinct.  But now I also wonder if the muders made the house *feel* a certain way, or if the house made the murders more likely...

(Message last edited Jul-15th-02  3:28 AM.)

I don't think there was a problem in that house because of the one maid who cooked.
I can tell you of a problem I heard about: two families in a house with ONE kitchen. Solved by adding on a separate kitchen for the newer generation. The older generation eventually left the house.
Was this arrangement all that unusual then, or now (unmarried adult children)?

Oooh, I'm glad you mentioned that picture.  It's in "Victorian Vistas" (I think Vol. II), and I looked at it last night and said, "That's not the Borden house, because the doorway isn't recessed."  (Silvia says it definitely IS the Borden house.)  Does anyone here have access to that volume of "Victorian Vistas"?  One thing I've noticed is that the pictures in the different volumes aren't necessarily from the time period covered by the book in which they appear.  I've noticed yet another house that bears a superficial resemblance to the Borden house; however, it seems to be a "wider" version of the same plan.  Maybe S. Miller did build the same plan over and over, with minor changes.

It even had that weird tree in the road just to the north of the house, but the tree was different too.  Real long skinny trunk, no branches showing before the photo ends.  (Some leaves).

I thought it might be an FRHS photo, but it gives a reference to "Courtesy: #5, Rev. barry Wall (sic), Archives of St. Mary's Church."

And all those people standing on the front step.  I thought "Andrew wouldn't stand for that!"  (At least not until he was dead...)

Is St. Mary's the church across the street?  If so, that house plan could have been duplicated on SECOND street...making that house style & function not unique at all!

I think that photo of the supposed Borden house was taken considerably after the Bordens lived on Second Street.  The costumes seem to be from a later period.  (Well, I couldn't tell about the nun.  They seem to have a knack for wearing totally classic apparel.)  I would guess those clothes are fom after 1900 and before World War I.  At the time I first perused it, I thought the illustrations in each of the three "Victorian Vistas" volumes were from the same period as the text in that volume, but that definitely isn't so. They're wonderful books, but I do wish the era of the pictures did agree with the text in the same volume.  It would also be nice (as someone else mentioned) if the photo captions appeared with the pictures, instead of in the front of the book.  I'd also like to know where all the items came from (which newspaper).

I'm a bit disenchanted with our volume, V.V. 1886 -1900.

So far it has raised as many questions as it may have answered.

The Trolley line business
And the Mrs. Dr. Chagnon death date.
And the caption about the house with nuns and children.

A source is merely a CURIOSITY and not dependable, when it does not match Knowlton Papers, which has been our Standard (in this family) for correct information.

Also it contradicts Harry and William in subtle ways that I am not comfortable with.

Nothing against the author/compiler BUT he seemed proud in his INtro, that his sources are ambiguious.(sp)?

Edisto, you are so valuable when it comes to design, clothing, period costunes, etc!  Thank you for the extra input!

After peering at it for a few seconds, I seem to see ghost images of people who were passing by. Just my imagination? A long exposure needed due to cloudy conditions (the low contrast)?