1. "When did the note come?"
Posted by Jimmy Windeskog on Nov-8th-02 at 9:44 PM

Lizzie talk about a not to Abby, but i cant see any detaljs in what Lizzie says about WHEN the note comes to the house or WHEN Abby tells her about it. Can any one help med with this?

And do anyone belive that the not was real?




(Pardon my bad english, iam from Sweden, terrible at english but very intrested by the Borden murdes...)

Hi Jimmy, welcome.

I personally do not believe there was a note.  For 3 basic reasons:

1.  No note was ever found.
2.  No one ever came forward who said they sent a note.
3.  No one ever came forward who said they delivered it.

The first may be explainable, but the last two are very suspicious. A New York publication called "Once A Week" offered a reward (I believe $500) for anyone to come forward regarding the note.  No one came forward.

$500 in 1892 was quite a sum of money, about $9,000 in today's dollars.


Don't worry about writing in English poorly.  You would not want to see me write in Swedish.  That would be scary!

Ok, i found it. Lizzie says that Abby told her aboute the note as soon as Lizzie came down that morning...

But if someone left a note they wolud have knocked on the door or rang the bell.
So at least Bridget or Mr. Morse should have heard this, Bridget DID open the door for the ice man.
But wasen´t Mr. Morse up att 06.00 and Bridget at 06.15?

Victoria Lincon talks about a young man thats outside the front door rigth after 09.00, and gets the door in his face.
Who i this witness? And why dose no one knows anything about this visit (mabye X who meet the boy KNOW that he was coming and opend the door for him?).
This boy, could he left the note?

The timing of the note would probably be from 9 a.m (after Morse left, AND after Andrew left) until the arrival back at the house of Andrew at 10:40 a.m. or so.
This would be the parameters because Lizzie is overheard Telling Andrew that Abby had a note, so that means If it came it came after he left at about 9.  Since she Does tell him this at 10:40, then that would be one hour and forty minutes that the note could come.

Lizzie says in her Witness Statement that "a man came" to the front door at 9 a.m.  No one else knows about this and she is our only source.
But doesn't Miss Lincoln claim that the man who came to the door that Thursday morning her grandfather?  Or is that incorrect as to my memory of what she claims?

Anyway, I didn't think about the note coming to the side screen door.  But as you say, no one knows about it, and Mrs. Churchill didn't see anyone nor did Bridget.

Hi, Kat - no, de Mille names one of the "two men" in the rig as Victoria Lincoln's grandfather, set on doing some matchmaking; Lincoln vigorously disputes this.  Lincoln, in her lovingly but maddeningly "completist" version needs this messenger to be a young man delivering the cover note that will enable Abby to get out of the house and to the bank - in Lincoln's theory, the woman is virtually housebound.  V.L. thinks it was then intercepted by nosy, woozy Lizzie (having her period, natch, and the temporal lobe whatsis), who "slammed the door," called up to Abby that she was coming up with a note and the laundry, and brought a hatchet along...

Lincoln thinks this is the self-same note burned up by Bowen, and that it would then have to mention Emma (as "Emma" was noticed on the paper Bowen was holding, as we know).  I love A PRIVATE DISGRACE, but I now realize that Lincoln means that this note for Abby (from Andrew and/or Morse), instead of sensibly reading something like:

"Dear Mrs. Borden,

May I request that you come as soon as possible - Marthy is no better, and I would like to run to Smith's to fetch some spirits of ammonia - would you come to sit with her?

Your neighbor and friend,
Tillie Chester"

would have instead run like this:

"Abby,

As I promised you, EMMA and LIZZIE will never suspect a thing if you now throw on a shawl and hurry out of the house to the carriage waiting for you downstreet.  Mention something about a sick friend, if you must. 

I will expect you at the bank shortly, and the land transaction will soon be completed without the knowledge of EMMA or LIZZIE.

AJB"

To paraphrase a remark from the trial, "Have you ever seen such a funny note?" ;}

(Message last edited Nov-9th-02  12:18 PM.)

I believe AR Brown does a good job in explaining why the sender of the not did not come foreward. It would have brought them into an intense investigation by the police!!! Doesn't this seem rational?

OMAGOSH BOB!
Thank you for all the info!
I am sadly distorted when it comes to Lincoln.
I had the Leontine right, but the wrong author!
Would that we had her here on this Forum!  What fun to quiz her on her sources!!!!!!  [      ]

Sure, Ray, it makes total sense, if you believe Brown's theory.  If you don't, it doesn't explain anything at all... ;>

According to the books, when Andy came home he asked about Abby. Lizzie said "she went out". And there were no other questions; Andy must have known about this note. Therefore, it did exist.

Unless this story was made up? But then why didn't Andy do something about the missing Abby if he expected her to show up at the bank?

Why must Andrew know about the note...you mean ahead of time?
If he believes Lizzie who says there was a note and that Abby had gone out, why not just sit down and wait.
Lizzie had testified that Abby also said she would get the meat for their meal while she was out (Don't know which meal, you could look it up--Inquest).  If she spoke "low" and/or Slow, then maybe this was part of the information Lizzie gave Andrew.
It is in testimony by Bridget that either Mr. or Mrs. Borden picked up the food at the store whichever one it happened to be.  And that this was done almost on a daily basis, if my memory serves.
The meal wasn't until noon, and Andrew rests at 10:40 a.m. on into oblivion...possibly waiting for Abby's return.
Haven't heard any sworn testimony about Abby due at the bank, I don't think...

Yes, that is the testimony of the survivors. I believe it. If Andy was missing Abby, then he would not have gone to sleep, but went out to search for her.

Think about it now. A man comes home, expecting his wife was to join him at the bank. She's not there, so he goes out again to look for her. Since this didn't happen, the invented story of Abby leaving for the bank isn't true. Use some common sense here.

But if he expected her to be away on call from the message, then he would do nothing. As what happened here.

According to your instructions, I'll try to use some common sense here, Rays. I am, of course, presuming for the moment the note in Bob's post that we are talking about calling Abby to the bank is a fact. 

That day, he was hot, tired, and was recovering from the affects of something that made him sick.  He was probably too shaky to go out and look for his wife at that time, having spent more than an hour downstreet already.

If he had gone out Lizzie would have been really suspicious that the note had less to do with "seeing a sick friend," than something which would require Andrew and Abby to be together.  Abby had told her the note meant she was going to see a sick friend, and why would that make Andrew get up and go chase after his wife if that was the case? 

No, Andrew would have thought that something happened between the time Abby got the note and when he got back to the house, they just didn't coordinate that morning, and he better sit tight. Something might have happened along the way, or maybe Abby had a relapse of being sick again and she had gone back over to see Bowen. There are many possibilities he could have thought of rather than rushing off to find her.  He most likely would have supposed that the event that was to take place at the bank would have to wait for another day. After all, he remembered what happened the last time he and Abby had a transaction and they were alerted to that fact, he had to give up some property to them he hadn't anticipated.

Are you saying that the note summoned Abby to meet a sick friend? Isn't that what was believed then, or now?
Or could it be a coded message that means something other than the written meeting? You can speculate all you want, all we know is what the survivors said.

The ONLY one who claims there was a note was Lizzie.

NO person claimed to have sent a note.
NO person claimed to have delivered a note.
NO note was found.

I see no evidence, other than Lizzie's word, that there was a note. And in her case it's the perfect excuse to forestall anyone looking for Abby.

(Message last edited Nov-14th-02  5:57 PM.)

I wonder what the plan would have been if Bridget had not overheard Lizzie telling Andrew Abby had a note?
If that one phrase had not been heard and believed and passed around as rumor...if Lizzie had never said it...where would this case be?  What would have happened next as Andrew sat down on the couch....?

Reading Bridget's trial testimony regarding the note, it appears Lizzie volunteers the note story to Andrew.  Bridget overhears some of that conversation.

Lizzie may or may not have known Bridget heard the part about the note. Minutes later she volunteers the note information to Bridget. From page 237-238.

Q.  You in the meantime washing the windows?
A.  I was washing the last window in the dining room.
Q.  Did she say anything to you, or you to her, while you were doing that, and she was doing what you describe?
A.  She said, "Maggie, are you going out this afternoon?" I said, "I don't know; I might and I might not; I don't feel very well." She says, "If you go out, be sure and lock the door, for Mrs. Borden has gone out on a sick call, and I might go out, too." Says I, "Miss Lizzie, who is sick?" "I don't know; she had a note this morning; it must be in town."

Lizzie seems to want to tell about the note to both.

Also, as for Bridget locking the door would not Andrew still have been at home?  And I would assume that it was standard in that house to lock the door when you left.

I had wondered if Lizzie had not known positively that she had been overheard telling that to Andrew, but then decided to go for it, and assume Bridget HAD heard and so she finalized her bluff, thus painting herself into a corner.  It seemed like a spur of the moment lie, simply because it could so readily be disproved.
She spoke low/Slow, maybe hoping Bridget wouldn't hear...BUT maybe Bridget was a notorius eavesdropper in that house, and especially so that day, wondering herself where the heck Mrs. Borden was!?  Matter of fact, how come Bridget never asked this from 9 a.m. until 10:40?  This surely was unusual?  For all we know, Abby might have been in the habit of checking Bridget's work to see that she was satisfied as to it's quality.....

Anyway, this reminds me of Morse being asked back for dinner by Andrew, but Morse, not knowing if Bridget (again, Bridget) had overheard his answer, thought he'd better come back for that noon meal, tho it seemed he hadn't really planned to [my opinion]..(Mrs. Emery was under the impression he was going right back to New Bedford from her house, she said.)

Maybe Lizzie caught a sight of Bridget straining her ears in the dining room and figured she had to not only stick to, but embellish the "note" story?.....

Thanks for the research and transcription.  Makes deducing easier!

(Message last edited Nov-15th-02  1:26 AM.)

So we have testimony while Andy was alive that there was a note that summoned Abby from the house. What does AR Brown say about this? We then can agree that Abby was to leave the house (so Andy would have privacy to meet with Willy).

I don't remember where this was said, but Andy being alive, he could have spoken up IF he disagreed with this statement. He was still master in his home?

I did say that I also believe (from the facts) that Uncle John did not plan to spend the night (not even a toothbrush!). Yes, AR Brown did say the msg from Dr Bowen was to recall Uncle John because of the tragedy. And that seems believable to me.

The note becomes less important after a while, once it is known there was no note and no note-bearer.  We can only assign motives to someone who would invent such a devise...a *devise* like what would be used in a play.
Maybe Lizzie saw too many theatrical productions...

Anyway, the result of saying there was a  note, is what's important.
The body of Abby is delayed being found.
Andrew can rest thinking his wife is out on an errand.

THEN:  How can Lizzie then say, *I thought I heard her come in..go look*, when Abby had been dead for almost 2 1/2 hours?
That is unbelievable.

When Bridget first testifies about the note she says that when she heard Lizzie tell her father about the note Lizzie did not include the part about someone being sick, only that Abby said she had a note and went out. Later, when Lizzie and Bridget were talking (your quote) Lizzie brings up the part about a sick person being involved.

Also interesting is that Robinson, in the trial closing statement he gives, he goes on for pages trying to convince the jurors that both Bridge and Lizzie heard from Abby about the note, when in fact, the information about the note came only from Lizzie.

Justice Dewey brought up the question, why would Lizzie invent the story about a note when all she had to do to remove Abby from the house was to say that Abby just went out.

I had asked Stef her take on this, once.
Why not just say Abby went out?

I guess Abby's only real *somewhat* DAILY jaunts were to the store for the meat, and possibly to see her 1/2 sister and family.
These places could be easily checked and quickly.  Or if Andrew decided to wait for her, he would know she would return pretty soon.  When she didn't, there might be consternation.
To allay any of this, and to buy time, Lizzie invents the note.
A silly, impromptu invention by an amature.

(This is not nec. Stef's opinion...it is something we thought might explain WHY....kicking it around)

(Message last edited Nov-19th-02  3:07 AM.)

Lizzie told the truth about the note since nothing would be gained by not doing so. It did not affect the cover-up. See AR Brown's book for an explanation and solution.

The note situation is fascinating. This is speculation, of course, but I have been thinking that perhaps Abby wanted to go across the street and see Dr. Bowen again, she maybe had a relapse and didn't feel well after breakfast, so she tells Lizzie she had a note about someone who was sick (really meaning herself) and she had to go out.  What she really meant was she wanted to go across and see Dr. B. and didn't want to make Andrew upset because he WAS clearly upset that she had gone over the previous morning and that Dr. B. had come back over later Wed. a.m. to check on her (Andrew told Bowen his money wouldn't pay for the call, etc.) But Abby never got to go over and see Dr. B., someone killed her before. Also, this might make sense in that remember, Lizzie told one police officer or in the inquest testimony, I think, that Abby told her that she didn't need to change her dress, the old one was OK.  The old one would be OK IF she was only going across the street.  That's my brainstorm.

That's an interesting premise, Carol.  I'm harboring a different theory that involves Abby being decptive regarding the famous note.   But I have to do a little more work to see if it will hold water.  However, I certainly don't dismiss the idea of Abby having her own little secrets in that household.

Sometimes I mull over Mrs. Churchill's testimony in the Preliminary Hearing.  Where she repeats 3 separate times that Bridget told her about the note; and uses almost identical wording every time. The fact that the wording is so very similiar makes me think that Addie thought about this exchange a lot before she testified.

Initially she says: "Bridget told me that Mrs. Borden had a note to go to see someone that was sick, and that she was dusting the sitting room and hurried off.  She said: 'She did not tell me where she was going; she generally does'." (Prelim. p.273).

Then, a little later she is pressed to say whether Bridget said Lizzie told her about the note:

A  She did not say who told her.  She [Bridget] said to me Mrs. Borden had a note to go see someone that was sick.  She was dusting the sitting room, and she hurried off.  She did not tell me where she was going; she usually does. (Prelim. p. 280)

And finally:

Q.  Won't you tell us again just what Bridget said to you. .... She told you this voluntarily, without anything being said to her?
A.  Yes Sir.
Q.  Now tell us again, as near as you can recollect, just what Bridget said.
A.  She said Mrs. Borden had a note to go and see someone that was sick.  She was dusting the sitting room, and she hurried off.  She said she did not tell me where she was going; she usually does.
(Prelim. p.288)

The words "she was dusting the sitting room, and she hurried off" almost make it sound as though Abby did tell Bridget about the note.  Doesn't it seem out of character for Lizzie to tell Bridget where and what Abby was doing when she got the note?  And also, if Bridget [i]is[/] quoting Lizzie -- it's odd that she melds Lizzie saying 'Abby hurried off' with Bridget saying 'and she didn't tell me where she was going'.  That sounds like one voice to me.

Just musing ...

Inquest
Dr. Bowen
Pg. 116
..." I thought if they did not call me I would go over and make a friendly call. I went over after breakfast. I think Bridget let me in. I am very sure it was the front door. I says 'Mr. Borden, what is that matter?' He looked at me and wanted to know if anybody had sent for me. I told him no, Mrs. Borden was over, I thought I would just come over and see. He seemed well enough then. He said he felt a little heavy, and did not feel just right, but said he did not think he needed any medicine. I did not urge him at all, of course, and I went home. I did not think much about it. I saw Mr. Borden out two or three hours afterwards. When I went in, I saw Lizzie run up stairs. Mrs. Borden I did not see, because I had seen her before."

--This is interesting on several accounts.  Firstly, Dr. Bowen seems to shrug off whatever snit Andrew may have gotten into about his visit.
He said he *didn't think much about it.*--this implies there was not such a scene as Lizzie painted in her story to Alice.  Bowen surely would have recognized such tension.
Also, Lizzie is not in the room.  She is not even downstairs.  She was seen running upstairs as Bowen was admitted.  So where does she get the authority to describe the scene she does to Alice Wednesday night?
Also, Bowen, in this depiction of events, does not see Abby.
Admittedly, the a part of the scene Lizzie describes could have ensued after Bowen left, but if neither were in the room or present when the consultation occurred, then how can we trust Lizzie's re-telling of it?  The principles are all dead, except Bowen who says he *didn't think anything of it.*

From Rebello, pg. 68+

"Mrs. Borden's Visit to Dr. Bowen"

"No Clearer! The Solution of the Borden Mystery Still Delayed / Police Working on Clues and Theories That Might Lead to the Perpetration of the Crime / Bodies of the Victims Conveyed To Oak Grove Cemetery," Fall River Daily Herald, August 6, 1892.

". ... A little later in the forenoon, I went over to see Mr. Borden. I found him reclining on the sofa in the sitting room. I asked him how he was, and if he thought anything poisoned him. He laughed and he said he guessed there was not very much the matter with him. ...That is the whole basis for the talk of poison ... and personally, I do not take any stock in the theory ... I see nothing thus far, sufficiently strong to indicate it." [attributed to]Dr. Bowen.

"Miss Alice Russell testified at the trial as to Lizzie's conversation about Mrs. Borden's visit to Dr. Bowen. Miss Russell recalled Lizzie as saying:
'Dr. Bowen came over. Mrs. Borden went over, and father didn't like it because she was going; and she told him where she was going and he says, Well, my money shan't pay for it....'  "..., and Dr. Bowen came over. And she [Lizzie]  said, 'I am so ashamed, the way father treated Dr. Bowen. I was so mortified.' And she said after he had gone Mrs. Borden said she thought it was too bad for him to treat Dr. Bowen so, and he said he didn't want him coming over there that way."
(Trial: 379)

--Just another view of Wednesday's visit by Dr. Bowen, other than Miss Lizzie's only say-so...which is uncorroborated.
--It also raises an interesting question that an *author* has proposed:
That Lizzie laughing on the stairs happened Wednesday morning.  Bridget answers the door...Bowen enters to see who he believes to be Lizzie running up the stairs.  She probably gives a nervous giggle as she goes because she is not *dressed* for *company*...

Or Bridget could have been having trouble with that front door lock again and said her little explicative, Oh pshaw or whatever, and Lizzie could have been laughing at that as she raced up the stairs.  Do you think that the Bedford cord wasn't fit to be worn in front of company? 

It's funny, but if Lizzie only wore it in the Early mornings, that is right after she gets up.
Say about 9 a.m.
I don't get dressed for the day, right away.  I throw on a house dress type garmet until I know my plans.
We've heard little rumors that Lizzie may have had a crush on Dr. Bowen, and we do think we know he has escorted her to church on occaision.
If I am in my "housedress" and someone calls, I may wish I was "decent".  If someone else were to answer the door, the least I would want to do would be to fix my hair, before appearing.
I think it's possible but could Bridget be so confused about something so critical...unless she didn't understand the magnatude and repercussions of saying Lizzie laughed on the stairs Thursday, if it was really Wednesday?  I would like to think it was Wednesday.

Yes, if she was just popping over to Dr Bowen she wouldn't have dressed up (did she do that the day before?). I asked before IF that note was to draw her up to the guest bedroom or closet where the killer waited for her? I think the murders were accidental, from the interaction of words, etc. But nobody can prove it either way.

In my opinion, Lizzie went upstairs because she didn't want to be part of the scene where Andy dismissed Dr Bowen. Don't girls often avoid unpleasant scenes?

Yes, Abby could have had her secrets, just like the purchase of the Whitehead house. Nothing wrong here.

Given the trial transcript, and the rehearsal that went on before, I think we should accept the testimony that Bridget heard Lizzie laugh when she fumbled with the locks.

But WHY did she fumble with the locks? My guess is that the deadbolt lock was fastened, and she overlooked it because it usually wasn't! I believe that Wm S Borden came in earlier when everyone was in the kitchen saying goodbye to Uncle John, then locked all the locks because he was not familiar with household custom (lock the door after you come in).

[In my experience, if a deadbolt lock is only fastened at night, somebody would have trouble if they didn't expect this.]

(Message last edited Nov-21st-02  5:23 PM.)

I remember you've said this before...that everyone was in the kitchen saying goodbye to Morse.
WHO do you think (or does Brown say) was in the kitchen?

If you believe each person's testimony, only Andrew and Bridget were in the kitchen and she wasn't paying much attention, let alone "saying goodbye".

Why would a murderer Triple- lock his closest escape route?

The "murderer" did not exist yet. He was there for a very private meeting. But he must have exploded at one of Abby's comments or insults, and killed her. Then there was only one thing to do (according to his insane logic).

In any event, he seems to have left by the back door (more privacy, or the buggy drove away). SOP for the wise (and wild animals) is to leave the den by another way than their entrance.

By Andrew saying "I did not think much about it," could have been referring to Mr. Borden's physical shape. He says that line after talking about how Mr. Borden and his illness, not about anything Mr. B. might have said to him which was uncourteous about a bill. Dr. Bowen doesn't say anything in that passage about Mr. Borden saying his money won't pay for any services rendered.

I also think that men don't take offense to such statements, especially if they come from other men, as women do. Dr. Bowen knew Andrew's state of mind about money and he might have brushed such a comment aside considering the source. There is evidence from other sources as to Andrew's feelings about money and sharpness with people in business, so it isn't unreasonable to conclude that he might very well say something like that to Bowen.

Mrs. Churchill is reporting what Bridget told her but Bridget doesn't say where that information comes from. I've read that over and over too and it isn't clear enough to me that it was Abby told Bridget about the note, although, as you say, it sounds like one voice.

But if Bridget is reporting her conversation with Abby why doesn't she say so. Bridget could have been disconnecting two conversations, one in which is the reporting of Abby having gotten a note and the other relating to the rushing off and not saying where she was going. Because taken as a unit of conversation, Bridget is saying that Abby had a note to visit someone who was sick, and in the next breath indicates Abby went somewhere, so the part about not knowing where she was going seems out of place.  Wouldn't Bridget have assumed she was going to visit the sick friend?  So I am thinking, maybe, Mrs. Churchill is piecing together two conversations or aspects of one and has left out something inbetween. 

Anyway, it's not clear enough for Robinson to have based several pages of his summary on, just my opinion.

I do tend to fixate on things like, that, I guess.   I wonder about Bridget telling Mrs. Churchill  that "Abby was dusting in the dining room and then she hurried off".   In her inquest testimony, Lizzie doesn't place Abby dusting in the DR and hurrying off in response to the note.  Rather, she has Abby pretty much finished with her chores in the spare room and chatting about Lizzie's health, the meat for dinner, the weather being hotter, newspaper wrappers etc. before she heads up to put the cases on the small pillows prior to leaving.

So if Bridget is parroting what Lizzie told her ­ where did she get the part about the dusting in the dining room etc.?  It's just contradictory testimony about the same thing, that's all.   Not that there isn't enough of that to go around already.

I see your point about Bridget knowing  that Abby was going to visit someone who was sick ­ but to me, that really only let Bridget know why Abby was going, not where she was going.

Or Abby was going up to the guest bedroom to finish something, and found somebody there? Could that note have been designed to draw her upstairs (better shawl, etc.) for the murderer to get her?

I don't think it was planned, just a very private meeting that went awry. Knowlton said "if I knew what was discussed the night before I could solve the crime", as if he KNEW (or suspected) what happened.

One more thing. In past ages, the phrase "hereditary insanity" was used as an euphemism for syphilis. But I was reading about the Chinese Salt Monopoly to assure consumption of iodine treated salt for human consumption. This prevent low IQ or retarded children, which was much more common decades ago (also w/o nicotinic acid in bread and flour). So maybe Wm S Borden and sisters and others were lifetime sufferers of a diet deficiency (much more common then?).

We certainly do know of the effects between diet and health?

Maybe they had lead poisoning.

Ray, where do you read that Knowlton said if he knew the conversation of Wednesday night he could solve the murders?  You've mentioned this before.  Is it a newspaper *interview* or what? (Sounds like a more candid voice of Knowlton than I've read outside of his correspondence...)

But Lizzie IS the last to see Abby, supposedly in the dining room.
If she hurried off or limped off or was carried off, or chased off, LIzzie would be the one to know.
Can you picture Abby *chatting* to Lizzie about these mundane things as a last conversation before slaughter?
Somehow I can't...unless Lizzie took pity, knowing *Today's The Day!* and actually had a civil Conversation with *Mrs. Borden*?

Maybe it was in Kent's "40 whacks", or quoted from the trial transcript. Shouldn't that be an obvious comment?

I only meant to hope that if you actually attribute a quote to Knowlton, and put quotes around it as if it was referrenced, then you could give that referrence.  Otherwise, to be helpful to others who may be learning, it could be shown as from your memory, or stated as "I think..."
THe comment is pretty candid for the trial but I'd believe that an *author* wrote it, but is it true?  It could be written as "I believe Kent said of Knowlton...."  Then a person could do further research if they were inclined to find the answer.

Lizzie was a woman, not a girl, and women don't avoid scenes anymore than men do.

To me the note tells why Abby was going out (someone was sick) and where she was going (out) but exactly where isn't known.

I think that looking at Bridget's own testimony is interesting regarding what Mrs. Churchill recalled Bridget telling her.  Bridget says, Preliminary hearing page 10:

Q: When you saw Mrs. Borden, where did you see her?
A: In the dining room, dusting.  She wanted to know if I had anything particular to do that day.  I told her no.  Did she want anything? Yes, she said she wanted the windows washed. I asked her how. She said on both sides, inside and outside; they were very dirty.
Q: Did you have any usual time to wash the windows?
A: No Sir.
Q: How often did you use to wash them?
A: Sometimes once a month, probably twice a month.
Q: Did you see Mrs. Borden after that?
A: No Sir.
Q: Where did she go to then?
A:  I could not tell you. I came out and shut the dining room and was in the kitchen.

Then on page 11 she says:
Q: That was the last time you saw Mrs. Borden?
A: Yes Sir. She had the feather duster in her hand dusting the dining room. I left her there, and went back into the kitchen.
Q: When you went back into the kitchen, did you see Lizzie?
A:  No Sir.
Q: Was she in the kitchen or dining room?
A: No Sir. I did not see her.
Q: You did not go in the sitting room then?
A: No Sir.
Q: That was the last yo saw of Mrs. Borden?
A: Yes Sir.
Q: Where she went after that, you do not knw?
A: No Sir.
Q: That was after both men had gone?
A:  Yes Sir.

So if Bridget had said to Mrs. Churchill that Bridget herself saw Abby hurried off, etc., then why didn't Bridget bring that up in her own testimony? Bridget in fact says she left Mrs. Borden in the dining room.

This is no disrespect to anyone.
I would just like to state here how my mind works on the subjective use of woman, girl, female etc.
I always use the term "Girl", and I hope this does not irritate anyone or sound pejorative or diminutive.  As A girl myself, these are my reasons:  (I can't speak for anyone else)...

Webster's Unabridged New Twentienth Century Dictionary, copywrited 1906-1968:

GIRL
Middle English:  a young person, either boy or girl
1. A female child; hence, any young unmarried woman
2. A maidservant
3. A sweetheart
4. A woman of any age, married or single.

--I liked that the word did not denote either sex specifically.
I had been looking for a word that would express female (years ago) but without deriving from the MALE.
All the other words for our sex, were derivitive or dependent on man or male.
"Lady"  takes her title from her husband.
"Mrs." is a wife.
"Wife" is an archaic form of housewife
"Mistress" is good at the beginning, meaning a woman who rules or has power, but another definition is of a sexual servant, or paramour.
"Woman" of course has the root word "man"
"Female" takes along the root word "male".
I think ther's more.  But I always wanted a word that was just "Me", not affliated with any word MAN, so I picked "Girl"--
And that's my story and as BobcookBobcook would say, I'm sticking to it, etc...

I've never been bothered by the word 'girl'.  In fact, my friends and I use it with each other all the time, like:  Hey girl, You go, girl, etc.  Now, 'girlie' bothers me, I've been called that by older men when I was in jobs that served the public, that has always sounded demeaning to me!

   Did you ever read the Salem witch trials, I always found the term for married women amusing; Goody, short for Goodwife.  Though it seems that the men were always called Goodman whatever.  I guess its from that time period where we get the term Goody-Two-Shoes?

   Oooo, or while younger were you ever called, Missy?  That one has always been up there on the demeaning list.  As in, Don't you ever use that tone of voice with me, Missy!  Ewwww! 

Do you suppose guys ever had to ponder such a problem?

I know there are men that don't like to be called 'boy' when they are men, they find it demeaning, but, I can't speak for all of them.  How about it guys, anything that you don't like to be called along these lines?  I know my brother doesn't like to be called 'sir', he feels too young to be called that. 

I've never minded being called girl, but there have been times
when I felt someone dismissed me by calling me that, like
a friend's "cheer up little girl" that would have gotten him
smacked if it had been in person. People always say "my, what
a pretty girl you are" never what a pretty woman, when I refer
to my sex I always call myself a woman, I don't mind being
a girlfriend but I feel childish calling a man my "boyfriend".
I can't call a man a boy, I wont be with a "boy", a "young guy"
is ok, but no "boys".

Lizzie Laughing On The Stair

From Lizzie's Inquest testimony, pg. 62:
(Now I know where the idea came from...):

Q. What had you in your mind when you said you were on the stairs as Maggie let your father in?
A. The other day somebody came there and she let them in and I was on the stairs; I don't know whether the morning before or when it was.
Q. You understood I was asking you exactly and explicitly about this fatal day?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. I now call your attention to the fact that you had specifically told me you had gone up stairs, and had been there about five minutes when the bell rang, and were on your way down, and were on the stairs when Maggie let your father in that day---
A. Yes, I said that, and then I said I did not know whether I was on the stairs or in the kitchen.
Q. Now how will you have it?
A. I think, as nearly as I know, I think I was in the kitchen.

--I included a bit more because it's part of the *transformation* of her evidence finally to be firm in saying she was in the kitchen after all...
--The morning before was when Dr. Bowen came and Bridget let him in and he saw (who he believes to be) Lizzie go up the front stairs.


(Message last edited Dec-1st-02  6:38 AM.)

Somehow I think this may tie in with the thread about "Prussic Acid" .

If Lizzie is not drugged at the Inquest and she realized she was recalling Bowen's visit Wednesday as to when she was upstairs when Bridget let in someone at the front door, then her vascillating before this realization, in her testimony makes sense from a shocked memory perspective.  She was downstairs when he returned.  That is her final answer.

(Message last edited Dec-2nd-02  4:33 AM.)

I believe that Lizzie's testimony "I was in the kitchen" was to place her far away from the death chamber (after she found out Abby was killed there). Like her retelling that she was in the barn, not outside where she witnessed the visitor leaving, and thus was a LIVE witness who could testify.

I believe that the first stories are truest, before they cam up with the later story. Isn't this most the most common sense approach? When you learn what you might be admitting, you then change your story. "I never knew what was going on." Its better to be thought stupid than knowing of some crime and not reporting it.

Well, she wasn't in the kitchen when Andrew came home, so I suppose it's a moot point.  Placing her laughing on the stair Wednesday only makes her seem less callous or *evil*.

She was not in the kitchen because she would have been close to the screen door when Andrew first tried to gain admission, and besides Bridget said she did not turn to SEE Lizzie on the stair Thursday, but remembers seeing her NEXT after Andrew's arrival, coming from the front hall area.
I figured she needn't yet still be coming from upstairs...she could be coming from the parlour?  From this testimony does that sound possible?

Preliminary
Bridget
Pg. 78
A.  I let Mr. Borden in, and went back to my work in the sitting room.
Q.  Where did he go?
A.  In the dining room.
Q.  What happened next?
A.  Miss Lizzie came down a little while after.
Q.  Do you know whether she did or not?
A.  Yes Sir, she came through the hall, and in from the sitting room.
Q.  Did you see her come through the hall?
A.  Yes Sir.
Q.  Did you say so yesterday?
A.  Yes Sir. The first she came there, she came from the hall into the sitting room.

A very good point! I'm sure Lizzie would have let him in by unhooking (?) the screen door. Unless the back door was closed and locked? Could be Lizzie was going down the stairs to the kitchen; she called for Bridget because that was her job. Doesn't everyone let their maid or butler answer the door, as in the movies?

(Message last edited Dec-3rd-02  12:21 PM.)

In your quotation, Bridget says, "Miss Lizzie came down a little while after," then has her coming through the hall and sitting room. Coming down would imply movement from above to below. The parlor was downstairs so she wouldn't have come down from the parlor, would she?
This leads me to believe that at least from Bridget's perspectie she believed Lizzie was upstairs, even if she didn't note seeing her, only hearing her.

Isn't it possible for Lizzie to have been in the kitchen, perhaps even the pantry area of it, and not heard Andrew at the back door trying to get in?  He might have just tried the screen, not yelled for someone to come get him, if he had no doubt Bridget too might have heard him from her position in the sitting room. She could have been in the kitchen and not heard him or it not being her job to answer the back what might have been referred to as "delivery door" she might have just not heard the door being rattled because she wasn't tuned into listening for it. 

About Andrew going to the back screen door, that itself is odd, because if it was always supposed to be locked up with the hook, he would have known he couldn't have gotten in, so why go there first?  Except for the possibility that he expected Bridget to be there or maybe his wife milling around.

Regarding cultural terminology, i.e., thanks for the feedback from everyone.  Regarding the use of the word girl to describe a woman, I have never run into an adult female who actually preferred to be called a girl, both by herself and others, so I find what you say, Kat, very interesting and enlightening.  I was wondering though, if you also prefer to call men boys or if you think they would prefer to be referred to as that? Perhaps it is an individual preference.  What do you men on the board prefer to addressed as, besides, that is, your name? Is it OK for us women, or girl women to call you men boys or is it just OK for you to call each other boys?  Would  Andrew have liked being called a boy? 

I figured Bridget could be assuming that Lizzie came from upstairs and that she realized that while answering and that's why she slightly modified her statement in the next instance to relate specifically the area of the hall.

I don't think it is reasonable to think Lizzie was in the kitchen and would not hear her father come to that side door.
Now, if she was in the cellar she might not hear him.  She may have had an innocent reason to be down there, too.  If she had been sick, wink-wink...and might not want to be THAT specific.

I too, wonder at that side door being hooked always then why would Andrew go there first.
For all he knew Bridget was upstairs lying down.
And he obviously didn't call out or the Buffinton house would probably have heard.
It seems that a key to the front door would be first choice to get in.

I use the word "guy".  I also use it for girls.
If he wears a suit then I call him a "man", usually.

Maybe he saw Bridget washing the windows when he returned, and assumed the back foor was open? When he found it locked, he knew Bridget would be by the front door?
SO why didn't he take his keys with him? Is this unusual?

I heard that "girl" referred to any unmarried female, and "boy" referred to any unmarried male. No matter what age. But customs changes. "I'll get my boy to do it", and you see a gray-haired geezer shuffling in (film from Britain?).

Isn't "girls" an in-group term? Like "boys" for a man's buddies? Like any terms, the tone may influence the meaning.

(Message last edited Dec-4th-02  2:55 PM.)

He had plenty of keys on him when he was searched by the Bowen, and after by the undertaker.
Keys he had.

Bridget was inside the sitting room washing a window, she claims, when Andrew returned.  She was therefore on the opposite side of the house from Andrew's approach from the north.  He wouldn't have seen her, or at least I don't think we can assume that scenario.

I think Bridget would have hooked the door when she came in, finished with outside (if one believes her).

I also think there probably was a *habit* involved and whatever approach Andrew made back to his own home each forenoon would be the same.
Any one of a number of people would have known of this habit, including Mrs. Kelly, but were not asked.

kat:

as i understand it, andrew could not open the front door because of an inside latch of some kind that could not be opened from outside with a key.  this latch was mainly considered a "night" latch.  this being an indication that someone deliberately wanted it locked against someone who might have a key.  do you concur with this?

and on this subject:  i wonder if this is not one thing we can be reasonably certain about -- that the murderer locked the front door before killing abby. 

i believe a neighbor did see andrew try the kitchen door.  as to why he would do this:  he probably figured bridget would be in the kitchen for one.......also, it was closer to his room there, where he intended to go first.

Somehow I didn't think you would be calling men boys, Kat. I find your individual linquistic patterns fascinating with reference to this issue.

Rays, thanks for the questions.  I found an updated version of different meanings of the words girl and boy in my dictionary. Kat's reference was from 1968. It is true that time changes the usage of words. The basic, No. 1 meaning for both words indicate it is used primarily to refer to children, this is why I believe and opinioned that Lizzie was not a girl, but a woman. Both girl and boy have offensive connotations and you are right, tone of voice does have a lot to do with that.

From Random House Webster's College Dictionary: 1991
All italics from the dictionary

Girl  n. 1. A female child, from birth to full growth.  2. A young immature woman, esp. formerly, an unmarried one.  3. A daughter.  My wife and I have two girls. 4.  Sometimes offensive. A grown woman  5. Girlfriend, sweetheart. 6. Often offensive a. a female servant  b. a female employee  7.  A female who is from or native to a given place : She is a Missouri girl  8. (a series of comments about girl meaning garment sizing)  Usage: Many women today resent being called GIRLS or the less formal GALS.  In business and professional offices , the girl or my girl in reference to one's secretary has decreased but not disappeared.  Such terms as the girls for a group of women , GIRL or GAL FRIDAY for a female assistant, and BACHELOR GIRL for an unmarried woman are frequently regarded as offensive, and WORKING GIRL in the sense of "a woman who works" is declining in use.  See also LADY, WOMAN.

Boy  n. 1. A male child, from birth to full growth  2. A young man who lacks maturity, judgment.  3. Informal a grown man esp. when referred to familiarly. 4.  a son.  5. A male who is from or native to a given place, He's a country boy.  6.  (comments about boy as referring to garment sizing.  7. Disparaging and Offensive, a man considered by the speaker to be inferior in race, nationality, or occupation.  8. Often offensive, a male servant. 9. -interj. 9. An exclamation of wonder or approval, etc. or displeasure or contempt.  (1250-1300: ME boy(e) bye servant, commoner, boy; of obscure orig.)

 

just through general reading, i've gathered that calling adults girls or boys (in that era) indicates that they were considered "servants."  lizzie would not have been called a girl.  this is simply the new england version of the southern tradition of the time to call black servants "boy" or "gal."  in the same way, "irish" in new england would correspond to "negro" in the south.
which is just an historical explanation.

The only word I object to being called is "MA'AM...but that is wholly subjective.  It seems like a term for an older person, which I am.  So I am getting used to it.

Have you all noticed on "COPS" that when they're after a miscreant, and catch him, they refer to him as a "gentleman"...
This is crazy-backwards, isn't it?
I figured they called him that because after they had chased him for several blocks on foot and over fences, with a video camera trained on them when he's caught and hauled to his feet, to call him "this gentleman" is to KEEP from kicking his ass!

Anyway, back to the Borden's front door:
Yes the front door was still night-latched.
It is Lizzie's or Emma's job to unlock the door in the morning, according to her Inquest testimony (E.,114), so with Emma gone, it would devolve to Lizzie and she did not do it.
She didn't that morning...that's as much as we know about that:
Inquest
Lizzie
61
Q. Who unbolted them that morning?
A. I don't think they had been unbolted; Maggie can tell you.

Whether it was unlocked and re-locked by a person unknown is someone's conjecture.
Andrew was seen at 9 A.M. by the kitchen door by Mrs. Churchill.
He was seen by Mrs. Dr. Kelly coming around from the north side of the house upon his return (10:35 according to Kelly), but only as he was making the turn.  He didn't look at her and she thinks he might have had his key in his hand, but  that is her impression as later she says she didn't actually SEE a key, but his *posture* seemed to imply this to her.  She does remember the small white pkg. tho.

kat:

haha.  i know what you mean.  i remember seeing on the opra winfrey show a rape victim telling her story, and she consistently referred to the rapist as "the gentleman."  i thought that was so ridiculous.

i stand corrected.  i was wrong to assume that the killer bolted the front door from the inside. (in the movie, lizzie bolts it on her way upstairs with the water pitcher.)  could easily be that the door was still bolted because it had not yet been used that morning.

however, what about the witness that saw someone open the front door to someone that morning?  how credible?

about the coats:  well i'm still confused.  i had the idea that there was a lighter coat like a jacket that he would have worn out, and that the prince albert was a heavier one.  and that it was the prince albert that was stuffed under the pillow.

Not that it matters, but until I was about 30, I would find bargains in Boys Clothing, size 22 (ourerwear). IF they still make them, it wouldn't fit me now.

Well, you're not wrong really as long as you don't call what you were speculating an *assumption*.  (BTW:  I use the *stars* to imply a rather loose quote, so as not to misconstrue what you said, but my interpretation of it).
A conjecture about the front door locks seems a likely place to start, since Lizzie claims someone came to the door that morning about 9.  Bringing that up is valid, as a reminder. 

Witness Statements
Lizzie
Pg.2
..."A man came here this morning about nine o'clock, I think he wanted to hire a store, talked English. I did not see him; heard father shut the door, and think the man went away."

--Granted, it's not specified which door.
And I think she is the only witness to this, unless you can name another.  (I will look it up if you can find a name other than Leontine).  And if you believe her...
--But didn't we hear from Churchill that she saw Andrew by the side steps about 9 a.m.?  How could both have happened?  I guess everybody's clocks are all off again...

Inquest
Mrs. Churchill
Pg. 126
A.  I saw Mr. Borden I should think about nine o'clock, the hour he usually goes down street. I was in my kitchen doing kitchen work. I happened to see him out in the yard.

Q.  You saw him going out?
A.  Yes, he was going as if he had been out in the yard, out by the barn, coming out around the back steps.

Q.  He went out on the street?
A.  I dont know. When I looked at him he was standing there by the steps as if he was headed for the street, to the west.

--She calls this "the hour he usually goes down street", so here we have another clue as to his *habits*.  Thank goodness for neighbors!
--I think the *coat* is on the "where does the blood go" thread.
I haven't been there yet.  If that's still confusing after I read that, I'll edit and comment here...

Yes, it is possible that the deadbolt lock was never opened that morning. But that would be against the household practice, so the survivors said. But why did Bridget assume that it was unlocked?

That's my assumption as to why she had a problem with opening the door. And why Andy couldn't unlock the front door; he also assumed it would be open - particularly if he did himself earlier!!!

[As I remember it, that book read in 1965 (and others) mentioned that someone was seen to go to the front door that morning (10AM?), then go away w/o being admitted. No one home then, as expected?]

(Message last edited Dec-8th-02  3:55 PM.)

I'm thinking more about the door.
I was just reading an author, Porter, and he paraphrases the closing arguments.
It is the defense who says the door was unlocked by Lizzie, that Thursday morning and they don't have to *prove* anything...(my paraphrase of his paraphrase)...and it is the prosecution who says *She did not do it that morning*.(per actual testimony)
People (like juries) tend to bekieve these summings up in court, so it seems understandable that the question about the front door being locked, unlocked and locked, or never unlocked etc. could be a smokescreen and that would tend to confuse people. 

I can't find anyone who says they came to the door that morning, so do you know who that would be?  If an author said it, I can double check their story if someone can remember where they read it, other than Masterton or Lizzie's word for it.  A *Witness*?

More about the doors & who came and went that morning before Andrew was found killed:

Bridget opened the side door upon arising.
The ice man cometh
Morse went out the side door
Bridget went out the side door to vomit
Around this Time MaYBE a note came (to the front door?)
Around this time "A man came, " to the *door*
[These last two per Lizzie]
Andrew left the house probably from the side door, as he was seen by Mrs. Churchill outside by those side steps around 9 which was his *usual* leaving time.
Mrs. Borden would be leaving shortly [according to Lizzie--because of note and food shopping]
Bridget *leaving* the house to wash windows outside

--I think that accounts for most of the leavings and comings through exterior doors that Thursday until Andrew arrives to find he can't get in at the front door, and Bridget claims it was totally locked.
--Either all of these people used the side door for all that activity or the front door WAS unlocked and re-locked at some point that morning?

Lincoln is the only author I can find who backs Lizzie up on saying that a man did come to the door to deliver a note:

   "At this point, while the girls chatted (Bridget and the Kelly's girl) on over the fence in the rear side lot, people began to notice things.

  A buggy with two men in it made a U-turn and stopped in front of the Kelly cottage.

  Next, a witness observed that the buggy had one man in it.  The witness gave him only a casual glance and did not recognize him--apparently he left the neighborhood almost at once, for he was not seen again.

  At approximately the same time--'around nine'--another observer saw a young man go to the Borden's front door and ring the bell.  The door was opened and quickly slammed in his face--by Andrew, it has long been assumed, though this was reported by a neighbor on the same side of the street, not a vantage point for seeing into the Borden's hall.  (The assumption has rested on the fact that under normal conditions Andrew was the only likely door-slammer in the household.)

  Then someone saw the wooden shutters to the guest room closed; several other neighbors noticed this, too, later in the morning, for they had never seen those shutters closed by day before."

I'm curious who all these witness' are?  I don't recall reading any of this in the witness statements or such, but, do you think its still possible that someone came to the door with a note and Lizzie knowing what the note was about slammed and locked the front door with the intent that Abby wasn't leaving the house for anything?  I personally can't think of any other reason why that front door should be so locked up if someone actually did come to see Andrew that morning or a note was delivered, it makes no sense.  The only other thing I can think of is that no one came and that front door was never unlocked from the night before. 

(Message last edited Dec-10th-02  12:25 AM.)

Thanks, Susan!
So it's pretty convienent for Lincoln to explain the *man who came* (per Lizzie) to the door as a person who also brought the note?
The door-slamming sounds bogus.  The neighborhood would've heard that door slam, especially Bridget IF she had been outside near the southwest corner talking to the Kelly's girl...at 9...but she was supposedly out there about 9:30, so THAT doesn't make sense.

The shutters closing in the guest room sounds suspiciously like the Trickey-McHenry phoney news article.

It's also ironic that Ms. deMille claims that the 9 a.m. visitor was Lincoln's own grandfather, Leontine, bringing 'round a young man to court Andrew's daughter!

Stupid question, but at that time wouldn't that boy have been at school????
   RedFern

Dr. Masterton surmises that *that boy* was little George Whitehead, who was 5.
I don't know as that was yet school-age in 1892, but still it WAS summer.
I remember Those days when school didn't start again until September!  (Well, not quite those days...)

I also would rather send an 8 year-old girl with a note 2 blocks and back, than a 5 year-old boy no matter what day and era it was.

I've been studying Lizzie's inquest lately.  this perhaps gets beyond the issue of just the locked front door, but look at what a mess her testimony about this is:

A. I think he came to the front door and rang the bell, and I think Maggie let him in, and he said he had forgotten his key; so I think she must have been down stairs.
Q. His key would have done him no good if the locks were left as you left them?
A. But they were always unbolted in the morning.
Q. Who unbolted them that morning?
A. I don't think they had been unbolted; Maggie can tell you.
Q. If he had not forgotten his key it would have been no good?
A. No, he had his key and could not get in.  I understood Maggie to say he said he had forgotten his key.
Q. You did not hear him say anything about it?
A. I heard his voice, but I don't know what he said.
Q. I understood you to say he said he had forgotten his key?
A. No, it was Maggie said he said he had forgotten the key.


My questions for Lizzie:

If you have reason to believe that your father did in fact have his key, why did Maggie think he had told her he had forgotten his key?

You say the front door was always unbolted in the morning. Who usually did it?  Why would it be left locked on that morning?

When did Maggie tell you that your father said he had forgotten his key?  You say you were not at the door when he came and could not distinctly hear what he said.

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

Notice this from Bridget's testimony:

Q. Was there any talk passed between you and Mr. Borden as he came to the door?
A. No, sir; not a word.

My take on this is that Lizzie is trying to explain how the normally unlocked dead bolt was fastened in the late morning.
Three answers: 1) in the morning's excitement somebody forgot to unlock it; 2) somebody later locked it because they were not familiar with household practice (Secret Visitor); 3) somebody locked it to prevent entry by Andy.
I favor #2; the front door was unlocked to let the Secret Visitor in while the rest were seeing Uncle John off. Then he went into the now vacant guest room.

Abby Borden Whitehead Potter said she was supposed to have stayed there that day while her Mom went to the picnic; her brother was sent elsewhere. This cancellation (on Wed?) tells me Andy wanted privacy that day (for his Visitor).
Unless ABWP was mistaken in old age?

One internet site listed "Trial of LB" as published in 1963, G Gross editor. That book read in 1965, and another account in the 1950s NY Daily News said a visitor went to the front door (knocked but was not admitted) and then left. No name or description. (My memory of it.)
Andy would be at the bank, Abby in the guest room, Bridget out doors (?), and Lizzie sitting on her chair somewhere(?).

This is a pop quiz.
You do not have to participate...but:

Who are *the rest* who are seeing Uncle Morse off out the kitchen door, Thursday morning?

My understanding is that Mr. Borden saw Morse off that morning through the kitchen door while Bridget was in the kitchen.

Righto in one!
Good answer.

*The rest *implies everyone, wouldn't most of you say?
This is only 1/2 of everyone, so it is not the rest..
OK .

Andy & Abby, w/ Bridget in the kitchen. Lizzie still upstairs.

(Message last edited Dec-13th-02  3:38 PM.)

Lizzie was not down yet at 8:45 a.m.
Abby, according to MORSE, went into the front hall at 8:30 a.m. and he never saw her again until he visited her cold dead body in the guest room, upon his return.

That leaves Bridget's testimony that Andrew only, let out Morse and SHE was in the kitchen  =  1/2 the people in the house, not the rest.  Thank You.
(Prelim., Bridget, pg. 7&8)

Thanks for your extensive quotes etc. So Morse said he didn't see Abby after 8:30. Just exactly when did he leave? Did Abby say goodbye or anything.
It is only Uncle John's word; I sort of believe him, but he has his reasons for his testimony if he was involved in bringing Wm S Borden to secretly visit. ABW Potter said she was supposed to visit that day; something happened on Wed to cancel the visit (need for private visit?).

[So who then fastened, or failed to unfasten, the night dead bolt lock?]


(Message last edited Dec-16th-02  1:47 PM.)

Yes, and no one knows whether Abby observed this event or not. No one asked Mrs. Churchill either, she could have seen Uncle John leave too, through her kitchen or front windows.

The point being made was that the rest were physically in the kitchen seeing off uncle Morse.
The diferent testimonies show that physically, only Bridget and Andrew were there when he left.
Yes, it's interesting that you brought up Abby's vantage spot in the guest room window if she happened to be looking out and/or hearing Morse's leave-taking.
If Lizzie came down around 9 a.m. and Abby was back downstairs by then saying she was almost finished in the guest room, than she very well might have been at a vantage point near a front window to noticeMores's departure at 8:45.  He says she disappeared into the front hall at 8:30.
BUt, something odd, is he seems first to imply that she didn't go upstairs at that time, only that she went into the front hall {Prelim. 241).  I guess he was judging by whether he actually remembered hearing her ascend the front stairs.  Maybe he assumed he would have heard that, and so did not infer she had gone up.  But on the same page, he says "she must be up there."
Maybe Abby was light on her feet.
Or he has subtlety changed his story all on one page.

Are we overlooking the fact (?) that Abby seemed to have avoided saying goodbye to Uncle John? What could have caused this? The conversation the night before?
So maybe Uncle John was there, as AR Brown says, to effect a transfer of property to Wm S Borden?

I don't know.  I won't assume that she avoided Morse but it's possible.
I often did wonder if that was decent etiquette for Abby to be dusting around where Morse was that morning.
I can't imagine doing that while there was a guest there.  Or even a visiting family member.
I thought maybe she was one of those ladies who doesn't like to sit still and is always doing something.
Or she was giving body language that was indicative of "Shoo, Shoo--Go Away" to Morse, *dusting* him out of the house.
She may have had a set routine of bits of housework every morning and left the men to themselves while she went about that.
I've never really had a sense of what Abby thought of John Morse.

I don't remember where it came from, but, if there is any truth to that statement given by Bridget that Abby had said, "I suppose we will have him all summer.  I don't know why he just doesn't find a woman and get married." when John Morse had showed up.  If true, it is quite telling on how Abby viewed Morse. 

Well, see of course I remember that...but discount it as it comes from Nellie McHenry.
She was the wife of THE *Trickey-McHenry* duo who screwed up this case.  She supposedly misrepresented who she was and claimed an *Interview* with Bridget.  (Knowlton Papers, 33)

Actually the point is if Andrew opened the back screen door and let Uncle John out then he wasn't physically in the "kitchen" was he? And we only have Bridget saying that Andrew let Uncle John out, and if she only heard and not saw him do it that adds another element of distance.  And I didn't say Abby was upstairs in the guest room, she might have been walking through the dining room and saw Uncle John meander down the path towards the front gate. We haven't the "exact" time relevant to Abby's various sightings in the house because people's memories were different, watches set differently, etc. and if Uncle John was gone he wouldn't know whether Abby was upstairs or downstairs when he left, he only knows when he said he saw her "last," and that doesn't have to match when she went upstairs.

We're better off having Abby in the guest room than standing in the front hall waiting for Morse to leave.  She entered the hall  & was gone from sight for 15 minutes, not seen downstairs again until 9 in the dining room saying she had finished the guest room so where ELSE would she be?  Already dead? 

Morse says Andrew saw him to the side door and asked him to dinner.  That is Bridget & Morse who say that.

In the end Morse decides that Abby must have been "up there."

If I am believing anybody at this point, this sounds simple enough to me.

(Message last edited Dec-20th-02  6:17 PM.)

It's always interesting to assign a belief in a situation to what certain people say. Choose who you like to believe at any moment, you are quite right on there. But what else is there to do, we haven't the people to talk to anymore.

Abby might have been in the parlor, that's off in the direction of the front hall. Supposedly she had a guest coming Monday so she might want that room in order, dusted.  And Abby didn't say she finished in the guest room, it was another person reporting that is what she said, Lizzie, in this case.  And on another link we have someone saying Lizzie's testimony was all lies anyway and nothing she said was believable. Uncle John is a challenge to believe all he says as well because he has an amazing lack of perception in his testimony on certain other issues, one being the time he came back to the Borden house for lunch...he said he didn't see the crowds on the street. So do we believe Lizzie part of the time, Uncle John part of the time, Bridget part of the time or one of them all of the time?  Neat trick if anyone could do it.

That Morse and Bridget both testified that Andrew asked him back to lunch, wasn't an issue we were talking about, it was whether Andrew was in the kitchen or at the back door.

I didn't realize there was a fine line distinction as to the kitchen or the back door.
Bridget seems to include the back entry into her broad idea of what encompasses the kitchen because the sink is there.
Is there a reason we should be so nicely precise as to kitchen or back entry?  Does this reveal something or get us somewhere?  I'm stumped as to what you may be getting at.

We have tried, or I have tried, not believing anyone (another thread you may have missed).  No one could imagine what thecharacters were all doing if they weren't doing something approximately near to what they said.
We have been labouring here to find testimony which seems reasonable as opposed to someone (Abby) hanging out in the front hall or the parlour, awaiting Morse's leave-taking (avoiding Morse?).  (Getting ready for company we have no proof for?...)
If it sounds reasonable that Abby was fixing up the guest room from 8:45 until 9 a.m,. then why not?   Is there an important theory you are getting at?
I obviously don't understand the point.
Do you think someone was hiding up there and that's why you will not place Abby in the guest room until she is struck down?  Any idea as to what time that was?

(Message last edited Dec-21st-02  5:33 PM.)

it's right after morse leaves that lizzie comes downstairs.  she has a brief exchange with abby in the dining room.  then she goes to the kitchen and gets a cup of coffee.  at that point, abby goes up to her death chamber, after some more dusting.

Bridget Timeline Based On Prelim. Test:

8:45- 9:00 a.m. -- Mr. Borden went back upstairs. Came down with his collar and tie and went into the sitting room. (pg. 9).

Lizzie came down to kitchen. (pg. 11).

Bridget went outside to vomit, "10 to 15 minutes". (pg. 11).

Did not see Lizzie when she came back in from outside. (pg. 11).

9 a.m. -- Bridget saw Mrs. Borden in the dining room dusting. (pg. 10).

Mr. Borden "was gone then". (pg. 10).

Bridget did not see Mrs. Borden after that. (pg. 10).
_______________

Lizzie Timeline Based On Inquest:

8:45 - 8:50 a.m.

Lizzie comes down "a few minutes before nine." "I should say about a quarter" [before nine]. (pg. 56, 59).

Saw "Maggie" [Bridget] and Mrs. Borden; Morse "was not there." (pg. 56).

The family had already breakfasted.

Spoke to her father, and Mrs. Borden . . . "spoke to them all."

Did not mention Morse, nor inquire anything about him. (pg. 56).

"When I first came down stairs I went down cellar to the water closet." (pg. 63).

Mr. Borden was in the sitting room reading the paper. (pg. 58).

Mrs. Borden was in the dining room dusting. (pg. 58).

9:00 a.m.*

Mrs. Borden had left the guest room "all in order". (pg. 63).

She was going to put some fresh pillow slips on the small pillows at the foot of the bed and was going to close the room . . . "

"She had done that [made bed, dusted, etc.] when I came down."

It would take "about 2 minutes" to put on the pillow slips. (pg. 63).

Did not see her after Lizzie "went down in the morning and she [Mrs. Borden] was dusting the dining room." (pg. 62).

"I left her in the dining room." (pg. 62).

"I should have seen her if she had stayed down stairs; if she had gone to her room I would not have seen her." (pg. 63).

Mrs. Borden could have gone to her room while "I was down cellar." (pg. 65).

Lizzie did not see Mrs. Borden when Lizzie came back from down cellar. (pg. 65).

"I had supposed she had gone out." (pg. 66).

Lizzie gone [down cellar] a little more than 5 minutes. (pg. 66).

"Maggie" had "Just come in [while Mrs. Borden dusted the D. R.] the back door with the long pole, brush . . . she was going to wash the windows around the house. She said Mrs. Borden wanted her to." (pg. 58).

Lizzie did not have any coffee or tea; does not know if ate any cookies. (pg. 59).

When she got down the breakfast things were all put away "except the coffee pot; I am not sure if that was on the stove or not." (pg. 59).

The next thing that happened after Lizzie got down was "Maggie went out of doors to wash the windows . . . " and Mr. Borden "came out into the kitchen and said he did not know whether he would go down to the post office or not. And then I sprinkled some handkerchiefs to iron." (pg. 59).

"Maggie" went out after the brush before Mr. Borden went away. (pg. 59).

"After 9 o'clock"

"It must have been after 9 o'clock" when Mr. Borden went down town. (pg. 60).

"I was in the dining room . . . [when Mr. Borden started away] . . . I had just commenced . . . to iron." (pg. 59).

---I have been under the impression that possibly when Bridget went out to vomit, was when Lizzie thought back in hindsight that that was when Bridget went out to start the window washing.  That she may have Confused the two. (The 9 o'clock thing).
---But I can't tell if Lizzie thinks she had conversation with Abby in the dining room as the last person to talk to Abby, and before Lizzie had her coffee which she denies having...
But Bridget recalls seeing Abby around 9 after she returned from vomiting?
---Notice how Lizzie says Andrew thought he wouldn't go down to the post office. ... Then Lizzie conveniently produces a letter to Emma she had written that day to be mailed to Fairhaven?

----http://www.lizzieandrewborden.com/CrimeLibrary.htm
LABVM/L---Chronologies/Timelines of specific characters


(Message last edited Dec-22nd-02  12:22 AM.)

If Lizzie gave her Dad a letter to mail to Emma, she had to have done it after Wed morning, the afternoon, or early that Thursday! To fill her in on the events of the previous day's conversation between Andy and Uncle John. Some have pointed out the unbelievabilty of Lizzie saying "she knew nothing" of the conversation Wed night.

Also, David Kent points out the unreliability of depending on the exact times when no one took notes or had an accurate timepiece.
Any timeline will not be 1000% correct (but does show industry!).

[But can we all assume correctly that Abby was killed after Andy left the house, or he would have heard something (voices, thump on floor, etc.)? Has anybody said he was hard of hearing?]

(Message last edited Dec-23rd-02  1:45 PM.)

The floor plans list the kitchen, the pantry, the sink room, ice box closet, back hall, screen door entry, all as separate features of the architectural plan of the Borden house.  Yes, I think it is important accurate when placing people in a murder case to be as accurate as possible. We've gone through a similar situation in trying to figure out where Emma was doing dishes when Lizzie burned the dress. If she was in the sink room where the water faucet was she couldn't have seen Lizzie's activities, if she was in the kitchen area she wasn't near the water faucet. So we make up our own conclusions about where she was. If Bridget was in the pantry room of the kitchen when Uncle John left she wouldn't no doubt have heard Uncle John's answer to Andrew about coming back for lunch.  If she was in the kitchen kitchen she was closer to the back door and might have heard what was said, yet she still didn't hear Uncle John's answer. So where was she? So if Bridget's opinion of what the kitchen was included the entire area of the back of the house, then she could have been standing right behind Andrew, him unaware, at the time Uncle John left.  So, where was she?  Yes, I think it important to distinquish between the architectural portions of the house. If other people don't want to, that's fine with me. Everyone looks at things differently.

If we are to believe what anyone says because it sounds "approximately true" as you say,  we leave out the possibility of people lying, or forgetting, etc. Testimony that only seems reasonable is also in the same category, not necessarily true.  I don't mind giving you my personal opinion as you asked for it. It is, I said Abby might have been in the parlour because you asked me the question, "so where else would she be" not because I have any great theory.  I will also place Abby in the guest room when she was struck down, but I won't venture to give a time because I don't know it. I won't place her fixing up the guest room earlier on at any time because I don't know it. And yes, I think like haulover that it was after Lizzie saw Abby dusting in the dining room that Abby went to the guest room but don't know when exactly. Like I said, maybe Abby took a twirl around the parlor before she went upstairs and no one knew she was in there for a period of time.

This is fine, but I just wondered what you thought might be the point of Abby being in the parlour?  I guess there isn't a point, other than to show that we don't know what went on in that house that morning at all because all the witnesses are either dead or suspects?
I still maintain that we can at least predicate our assumptions on what each family member was doing by if what they say sounds reasonable....  and that when Lizzie did get down and finally saw Abby in the dining room, Abby apparently said she was almost through up there, but would return to put on pillow shams.

So Morse says she must have been up there.....Abby says to Lizzie that she had been up there and would return..So I just don't see the need to complicate an issue by deciding Abby was in the parlour.
If a cool theory of the crime hinged on Abby hanging out in the parlor before her death, then I'd say, I'd love to hear it..otherwise it just tends to confuse things.  If you want Abby in the parlour, Abby can be in the parlour.  This would place her death maybe closer to 9:30, which is near to what the experts say.  I prefer her in the guest room, nearly around 9:05 and killed then.
That may be our difference. But we each don't know, that's for sure. 
----
[BTW:  I am stubborn when it comes to being misquoted.  I know it is not on purpose, or done for any harm, but I will put here exactly what I did say, and hope, please, if anyone wants to quote me they would use the direct line I posted.  it's just a thing I have.  Thanks]   "No one could imagine what thecharacters were all doing if they weren't doing something approximately near to what they said." --as opposed to "approximately true."
----------
As to Where Bridget says she was when Morse left, do you have copies of the source documents?  It is in there if you care to check...I checked, before I wrote that last post you are alluding to..  You can find that answer.  It is interesting, if you want to know exactly.

[Edit Here:--I had asked you, Carol, if you had the Preliminary Hearing, because that is where I got my answer as to Bridget's broad definition as to the kitchen.  You didn't answer but I would like to post the info here for those who don't]:

Prelim.
Bridget
Pg. 15
Q.  Where is the sink, right opposite the screen door?
A.  It is the left side of the kitchen, next to the back yard.
Q.  That is where the back entry comes out?
A.  It is way in the back part of the kitchen

Pg. 7+
Q.  You saw Mr. Morse go out?
A.  Yes Sir.
Q.  Who let him out?
A.  Mr. Borden.
Q.  How long after breakfast was that?
A.  I should judge quarter of nine. I cant tell the exact time.
Q.  Which door did he let him out of?
A.  The back door.
Q.  Where were you when he let him out?
A.  Mr. Borden let him out; I was still in the kitchen.

Pg. 8
Q.  Did you hear him say anything to Mr. Morse?
A.  I heard him ask him to come to dinner.
Q.  What did Mr. Morse say?
A.  I do not know.
Q.  That is when they were at the door?
A.  Yes Sir.

Pg. 67
Q.  Can you not remember whether Mr. Morse went away before or after you finished washing your dishes?
A.  He went away before I finished washing my dishes.
Q.  Did he go away while you were washing your dishes?
A.  Yes Sir. I was washing the dishes when Mr. Borden went to the door with him; he did not go out.

Since the sink is considered part of the kitchen that was Bridget's answer.  Also, as you pointed out, the sink is very near the side entrance.
I am concerned that you may not have these resources?


(Message last edited Dec-24th-02  3:28 AM.)

So why wasn't Abby saying goodbye to Uncle John? Some sort of snit?

We can POSITIVELY say that Abby was in the guest bed room when she was killed. No one is going to lift 210 lbs of dead weight up those stairs, and dragging her body would leave a blood trail.

[Trying to solve this case with the newspaper reports or official documents is like trying to "plow the ocean". It can't be done, now or in 1893. But some like it as a hobby.]


(Message last edited Dec-24th-02  12:26 PM.)

Kat said, quote "...but I just wondered what you thought might be the point of Abby being in the parlour?  I guess there isn't a point..."
I said before Abby might have been in the parlour dusting it because she was reported to have been looking forward to a house guest Monday and they might have wanted to use that room. If she was in there with the door closed Uncle John wouldn't have known, no one in the house would have known, he only saw her in the hall area. He may have assumed she went immediately upstairs because that is where she was found later. It is also possible that Abby, while in the parlor, sat down and had a rest for a half hour or so before she then went upstairs to put the pillow shams on. We have no evidence this was so or not so, but Uncle John has no evidence that she went immediately upstairs either. Sorry you think my idea "tends to confuse things," but I understand, you like many people might be more comfortable with her not being in the parlor because it is a new thought and challenges what is assumed to fit approximately. As Arnold Brown says, many facts of the case were wrong because people took everything as it was handed down for so long.

From the testimony you post I have not concluded that Bridget was in the sink room from what she says. These are three parts of testimony which are unconnected. The attorney does not ask her if she washed dishes in the sink room, just where it was located. Do you know for sure that the dishes were washed in the sink room? Water needed to be heated up for washing dishes, I would suspect that Bridget got the water from the sink room, carried it into the kitchen kitchen (main room) and heated it up on the stove, then put it into a container from which she washed the dishes, and she then had room to put the dishes out on the table for drying, etc.

Regarding your "...where I got my answer as to Bridget's broad definition as to the kitchen," I will respond as follows: The fact that Bridget distinquishes between the sink room and the kitchen and the back door tells me she considers them different areas.
She says in your quote as to the location of the sink room "..It is the left side of the kitchen." If it is to the side of the kitchen it isn't in the kitchen.  To me what she says is that the sink room and back door area are in back of the part of the house called the kitchen because she goes on to say that she was in the kitchen when Andrew let Uncle John out, i.e., in my understanding, the main big large room kitchen kitchen.  

Actually Abby in the parlour, or Anybody in the parlour is not a new thought to me.  I have been trying to place someone in that parlour for a long time, but there were no *buyers*.
I think the parlour is suspicious.
I'd LIKE the parlour involved.*
I haven't made up my mind on anything, so I am open to alternatives...BUT...as I say, since I am a proponent of Abby dying shortly after 9, (when once I was of the popular opinion that she was killed nearer 9:30), I personally don't heve time to put her in the parlour.
You can put her anywhere you like.
The difference between us then would be mainly her time of death.
While aware that Abby has maybe not been seen by anyone after 9 a.m., it has been hard to account for her whereabouts up to the time (9:30) when Bridget says she next see's Lizzie at the screen door.  We have the mystery of the absence of both Abby & Lizzie from the scene (according to Bridget) for that crucial half hour.
So Abby in the parlour...where is Lizzie? 

*--Bridget says she never went in there Thursday.
--Lizzie says she remembers telling Bridget to shut the parlour blinds.

Washing dishes in or by the sink is the modern custom. Bridget may have drawn the water and washed in the kitchen (more light?). Or have walked in and out to see what she saw.

I don't want to give away any secrets, but you don't necesarily need warm water to wash dishes. Soap yes, let them soak a little, then its easy to wash if not greasy from fat. Was there a greasy meal that AM?

Abby's stomach contents had oil in it.
Whether that was castor oil or mutton grease, we don't know.
(C'm on, Ray, you know what they had for breakfast).

It's odd that Bridget says that after Andrew let out Morse (but didn't himself go out), he brushed his teeth at the sink.
I don't know if she is finished with her dishes by then, or not...

My suggestion, based on what I read, is that the note would;ve come around the time Uncle John left. Either by the front door or rear. Unless JM chose to suppress what he knew.
To my, leaving the front door unlocked before JM left would allow someone to enter and go upstairs while the noise from the rear covered the entrance; closed doors too?
Unless that note was invented as a cover-up. But I don't believe it. I do believe that modifying the facts is more common than inventing them, in this case, and others.

I tend to agree that modifying the facts is a better & easier way to tell a tale, than making something up, especially if one is not so used to telling tales.

But Where are  Abby & Lizzie from 9 to 9:30?

My videotape of that time tells me that Lizzie was up in her room, awaiting the departure of Uncle John (assumes they were on the outs at the time). And if Abby was in the parlor or DR it means SHE too was too upset to say goodbye. Isn't that out of character, then or now?

[Just kidding about the videotape. That was a way to say there is no objective, definitive "truth" to back me up, or anyone else.]

Happy New Year!!!

From what I can observe from the floor plans the sink room at that time (if it has been renovated then I don't know, never been to the house) was a little room.  Was there an area for stacking dirty dishes, putting them into a drying container and then a place to stack the clean ones for transport into the kitchen or dining room? Also wouldn't it be inconvenient to do dishes in an area where there was a pump faucet? Or did the Borden's have a modern type faucet, one that was just turned and out came the water? There are many points which make me think that dishes were done in the kitchen not the sink room.

Well yes, some people did or still do wash dishes with cold water, (when camping) and other times but not as an everyday thing.  I would think that odd to do every day in a family home with a servant during those times.  Did restaurants also do that in Fall River, ugh.

I would think that making Johnny cakes would take some sort of butter in a frying pan if they were something like our modern day pancakes(although I don't know exactly how they were made then really).  Perhaps they were made in the oven? Didn't Uncle John also call them sugar cakes?

Bridget says that Andrew let Morse out and went into the sitting room, then he brushed his teeth at the sink.  Am not sure she said brushed, I thought it was "cleaned."  I know once in her testimony she said "cleaned" his teeth.  If he did that while she was in the midst of washing dishes in the sink room....it was pretty crowded in there.

Thanks, yes, went into sitting room then cleaned teeth at sink.
"Artificial teeth in upper jaw." --says autopsy.  Wondered if that was a few teeth or dentures.  Got waylaid picturing Andrew taking out teeth to rinse or wash them at the sink while Bridget was doing dishes there.
Hope she was done by then.

BTW:  I heard on T.V. that soap residue on improperly rinsed plates can cause stomach-flu-like symptoms.

You know, from Bridget's statement that Andrew cleaned his teeth at the sink, I get that very picture, he took out his denture plate and washed it there.  I too hope that he didn't do it in Bridget's soapy dish water, yuck! 

(Message last edited Dec-29th-02  12:29 AM.)

"The King was in his counting house
counting out his money
The Queen was in the parlour eating bread and honey."..?

-my video tape!
Ray, Happy New Year to You Too!

In a family where eating three day old mutton broth, using old newspapers in a basement privy and emptying slop pails onto the back lawn was a way of life, I suspect washing one's dentures in the dishwater in the kitchen was no big deal.  No matter how one looks at the Bordens, I don't think I would want to spend a whole lot of time with any of them.

I can't figure out why Andrew's fake teeth weren't found on his chest after the facial blows he sustained.

One word: Fixodent.

From what I read, the dentures of the 1800s were fitted into a dark red rubber base that was self adhesive in the mouth, I assume it had a suction cup effect.  Pretty interesting reading actually.  Heres a link to one site.

http://cudental.creighton.edu/htm/history.htm

Thanks for the link and everything one wanted to know about early denistry.

Now, still, we don't know to what the M.E. referred when he noted that Andrew had "artificial teeth in upper jaw."
Could that be partials within a framework?
Was that still too technical for Andrew's day?

If Geo Washington had false teeth, a century earlier, then you may be ASSUMING relative primitive dentistry.

Dentists (French term) are so called because of French leadership in this technique back in the 17th century or so.

The only thing I am ASSUMING is that Andrew's false teeth were not necessarily full upper Dentures.  Thus my questioning of whether dentistry had the ability to fashion those partial plates, or whatever they're called. ... Those false teeth held together with wire and fit into the gaps where teeth were missing.
If the latter was the case, then this devise might not be so easily dislodged as to be found outside the body, after the assault.

Good point Kat.  The autopsy at 

http://www.lizzieandrewborden.com/AutopsyAndrewBorden.htm

doesn't mention their location.

The blow marked as #1 cut through from above the nose to the lower jaw. This included the upper jaw and must have been a rather forceful blow.

Is it customary to leave false teeth in a deceased person? Apparently he was buried with them. I have no idea as to that.

Oh gosh.
I hadn't even thought yet of burial.

Really why I was wondering was merely to decide if that might be one extra thing that got moved. or removed or pocketed until later, by a well-meaning(?) doctor and never referred to again until autopsy.  It would be like moving the body, to me.

Well, this was current times, but, a friend of mine that passed away was buried with her upper plate in.  It was taken out at the hospice while she was dying and asked for by the undertaker while preparing her.  I would think that the same was done with Andrew and Abby.

I'm not so sure that he took out any teeth to clean them, perhaps this was the manner of speech in those days, to clean instead of brush teeth.  Maybe they didn't have toothbrushes like to have today then. From what is said about Andrew, he didn't like tobacco, liquor, excessive medical attention, etc., my guess is that he wouldn't have washed dentures, if he had them, in dirty dish water. Besides that, if he was in the sink room he wouldn't have had dish water there according to my opinion because the dishes were washed in the kitchen where the stove was.  Also, even if he did throw out his slop pail in the yard, at least he washed it out in the barn before coming back in the house with it, Bridget saw him unlock the barn and go in, which indicates some form of attention to cleanliness on his part. I am thinking he did this because why else would he go into the barn that a.m. before he came back in the house?  Thoughts?

If his teeth were removable I just pictured Andrew rinsing them under the fawcet, his nearest source of running water before getting ready to go out.
If Bridget says he cleaned his teeth than:
She either saw him do it
or
He did it every morning and she had seen him do it previously to know to say he had done it.
Since the sink room is a step-in type of room, then we can say that probably at one point she stood right there and witnessed this.

I recently read a book on a Civil War battle. It mentions that soldiers carried their "toothbrushes" with them. As I remember.
We are not the people who discovered everything.

According to a webpage on toothbrushes, Massachusetts was among the first to be involved with this innovation. Here is a quote:

"The first American to patent a toothbrush was H. N. Wadsworth. Companies began to mass-produce toothbrushes in America around 1885. The Pro-phy-lac-tic brush made by the Florence Manufacturing Company of Massachusetts is a good example of an early American made toothbrush. The same company was also the first to sell toothbrushes packaged in boxes. The first nylon bristle brushes were introduced in 1938. Hard to believe, but most Americans didn't brush their teeth until soldiers brought the Army's enforced habit back home from World War II...."

So we know toothbrushes were available but whether Andrew used them or not we don't know.  If he had one he probably used it on his teeth, artifical or otherwise. I would think as toothpaste was also available that he also used that and not just rinsed his mouth out or ran water over his false teeth. That would mean those things would have to have been stored in the sink room or else he brought them downstairs, as did all the other Borden folks, every day, what a chore, almost as bad as having to toss out slop pails.

Don't know about the terminology though, cleaning versus brushing teeth. I have a feeling that since brushes were fairly new (if the men in the Civil War had them prior to mass production in 1885, then I'd like to see a picture of what their homemade variety looked like) that saying a person brushed his teeth was not yet in vogue. Maybe Andrew hadn't caught on to wanting a toothbrush.

Tooth brushes have existed for centuries. Even George Washington had one and it can be seen at Mount Vernon.  They can be traced to the time of ancient Egypt.  The problem is that a toothbrush, alone, does little good especially in the age of processed sugar.  Egyptians, Greeks, Romans etc. had almost no incidence of tooth decay and this has been documents by examining Egyptian mummies and Roman remains at Herculaneum (destroyed they same time as Pompeii) because they had no processed sugar in their diets. They also used substances such as ashes as a cleaning agent. The problem of tooth decay is a direct result of the introduction of processed sugar into the diet.  In any event, I have always believed that Andrew was not brushing his teeth that morning; he was rinsing his dentures.  Now, I am not so certain!

(Message last edited Jan-9th-03  7:17 PM.)

I'll just post the whole paragraph from that webpage:

"Toothbrush and Toothpaste
Toothpaste was used as long ago as 500 BC in China and India. Modern toothpastes were developed in the 1800s. A dentist called Peabody was the first to add soap to toothpaste in 1824. Chalk was first added to toothpaste by John Harris in the 1850s. In 1873, Colgate mass-produced nice smelling toothpaste in a jar. In 1892, Dr. Washington Sheffield of Connecticut was the first to put toothpaste into a collapsible tube. Sheffield's toothpaste was called Dr. Sheffield's Creme Dentifrice. In 1896, Colgate Dental Cream was packaged in collapsible tubes. Advancements in synthetic detergents (after WW II) replaced the soap used in toothpaste with emulsifying agents such as Sodium Lauryl Sulphate and Sodium Ricinoleate. Colgate research resulted in the use of fluoride in toothpaste. Early toothbrushes used bristles from the necks of cold climate pigs. Natural bristle brushes were invented by the ancient Chinese. French dentists, promoted the European use of toothbrushes in the seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries. The first toothbrush mass-produced was made by William Addis of Clerkenwald, England. The first American to patent a toothbrush was H. N. Wadsworth. Companies began to mass-produce toothbrushes in America around 1885. The Pro-phy-lac-tic brush made by the Florence Manufacturing Company of Massachusetts is a good example of an early American made toothbrush. The same company was also the first to sell toothbrushes packaged in boxes. The first nylon bristle brushes were introduced in 1938. Hard to believe, but most Americans didn't brush their teeth until soldiers brought the Army's enforced habit back home from World War II. The first real electric toothbrush was produced in 1939, developed in Switzerland. The electrical toothbrush was first marketed in the United States in 1960 by Squibb. The brush was called the Broxodent. General Electric introduced a rechargeable cordless toothbrush in 1961. Interplak was the first rotary action electrical toothbrush for home use, introduced in 1987."

Another site said early toothpaste was made from ingredients which included mice and urine among other things.  And early toothbrushes were nothing but twigs with one end smashed up. I wonder what dentists used to advice clients, to use the brush or not in 1892? It doesn't seem that there was any desirability of having white teeth weren't an issue in those days.

Mice and urine?  I think I just learned more about dental care than I ever wanted to know.

Wow, I knew that urine was used in alot of things over the years, but, toothpaste, ewwww.  And I can't quite figure how mice were used in toothpaste, I would assume that they were ground up into a paste or maybe it was their bones to act as a granular substance to help clean your teeth?  I wonder if it came in Mouse & Swiss or Mouse & Cheddar flavored toothpaste? 

Well, now...do you prefer mouse over pigeon?

  I think I'll stick with the mice.  Knowing my luck, if they made toothpaste with anything from pigeons, it would probably be their poop! 

I can't say about the pigeons but here's more. It really makes you wonder what a person knows about what's in the products they use without thinking, just because it's custom.

The Website is "History of Dentistry and Dental Care. Besides those macabre ingredients of mice and urine, also used were "powdered fruit, burnt shells, talc, honey, ground shells, dried flowers...the head of hare, lizard livers."

Also, here are excerpts from the history of toothpaste: "The development of toothpaste began as long ago as 300/500BC in the ancient countries of China and India....

During the years 3000/5000BC, Egyptians made toothpaste using a recipe of powdered ashes of hooves of oxen, myrrh, powdered and burned egg shells and pumice. Directions were given that all should be mixed together, but there were no specific instructions as to how the powder should be used.

It is assumed that the ancient Egyptians used their fingers to rub the mixture onto teeth. The toothstick, the forerunner of the toothbrush had not, as far as is known, been discovered at this time.

From the records of the ancient countries of India, China and Egypt, it was the Greeks and Romans who developed and improved toothpaste....

During 1000AD, evidence shows the Persians further developed toothpaste. According to writings, advice was given on the dangers of using hard toothpowders and recommendations were made to make toothpowder from burnt hartshorn, the burnt shells of snails and oysters and burned gypsum.

Other Persian recipes included dried animal parts, herbs, honey and minerals. One formula for strengthening teeth included green lead, verdigris, incense, honey and powdered flintstone.

Toothpowder or dentifrice was first available in Britain in the late eighteenth century. It came in a ceramic pot and was available either as a powder or paste. The rich applied it with brushes and the poor with their fingers.

The powders were developed by doctors, dentists and chemists and often contained ingredients that were highly abrasive and harmful to the teeth, such as brick dust, china, earthenware or cuttlefish....

Before the Second World War, the majority of toothpaste on the market used soap as an emulsifying agent...Following the Second World War, advancements in synthetic detergents meant soap was no longer used in toothpaste and emulsifying agents such as Sodium Lauryl Sulphate and Sodium Ricinoleate used instead.

Information supplied by 
About Us | Disclaimer
Copyright 1998 1999 2000 E-Doc
Send Questions and comments to the Pagemaster
HTML by: E-Doc Reprohouse
Last updated: 20 June 2001"

Thanks for all the info.

I just use baking soda.

Maybe "brushing" your teeth referred to using a washrag w/ tooth powder? I think I heard of this as a child in the 1940s.

I remember "Dr Lyon's Tooth Powder"? from the 1940s. As a child, I always spilled as much as went on the brush. Paste was a big improvement.

Did Native American use the mashed ends of twigs?

(Message last edited Jan-14th-03  5:06 PM.)