Lizzie Signature for only $75, or so they say

Stefani · Post by **Stefani** » Sat Jun 10, 2006 12:10 am

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?Vi ... 6636707167

I think I have seen this one before on eBay. I wonder why they are selling it? And so inexpensively. Hmmm. care to comment anyone?

doug65oh · Post by **doug65oh** » Sat Jun 10, 2006 12:41 am

Not so much a comment as a question: Is it my cynical, suspicious mind, or does that signature look too perfect?

mbhenty · Post by **mbhenty** » Sat Jun 10, 2006 12:56 am

Wow Stefani, your right on top of that site. (as you should be

) I checked it just a while ago and that item was not there. Must of got lost in-between all the poker chips. Did you notice he listed it for only 3 days?

I remember another that was on last year, but it had many other Fall River signatures in it also, including Lizzie. Wonder if there are other signatures in the booklet?

Harry · Post by **Harry** » Sat Jun 10, 2006 7:41 am

I note that the signature shows the middle initial with the rounded "A" form. The only other place I have seen that was where she signed in the book for her dividends. This is the book that has been up periodically n EBay in the $4,000 range.

Her library card (year?), the bird letter to Mr. Brayton (1900), two books known to have been Lizzie's (1912 and 1914) and her burial instructions (1918) all show the fancy "A". There is also another dividend signing showing the fancy "A".

I never thought Lizzie would be inclined to sign autographs unless she knew the person very well. If she did sign it, the absence of any words other than her signature would seem to me she didn't know this person. I think Lizzie was a sentimental person and would have added something personal.

I'm highly skeptical.

Harry · Post by **Harry** » Sat Jun 10, 2006 8:30 am

There are two other examples with the fancy "A" signature. The "I dreamed of you" letter (1897) and the "Dear Manda" letter (1908).

If it was not an autograph to a person she knew then I can't figure out why she would sign her name.

Can't you just see the autograph seeker running up to Lizzie and saying "Oh, your Lizzie Borden, the famous hatchet murderess. Please sign my book."

Let's face it, if it wasn't for the murders who would ever had heard of Lizzie Borden.

Fargo · Post by **Fargo** » Sat Jun 10, 2006 8:39 am

I am thinking the same kind of thing. Lizzie was famous for something that she never wanted to be famous for, the wrong reason. Lizzie probably wouldn't have signed an Autograph book knowing that someone could use it and say "Here's Lizzie Borden, the Axe Killer's Signature." Unless it was signed before the murders. That paper looks pretty good for it's supposed age. I guess it might have been looked after, but why sell it so cheap?

Harry · Post by **Harry** » Sat Jun 10, 2006 9:20 am

There's not much reason to believe that it is her signature.

Regarding the date of the library card, as pointed out in Len Rebello's book, page 303, her address is shown as 306 French St. When she and Emma bought Maplecroft the address was 7 French Street. All street addresses were renumbered in 1896 and number 7 became 306.

So the card was issued after the street renumbering in 1896 which narrows the date some.

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Mon Jun 12, 2006 12:55 am

Isn't there something odd about the middle initial? Doesn't it look over-traced? Or traced-over, however one puts it?

I have a photocopy of a xerox of another autograph book page, where a supposed Lizzie signature comes after a sentence of sentiment. It has the middle initial as the "rounded A" which is what you are describing, Har?

william · Post by **william** » Mon Jun 12, 2006 9:41 am

One of the major problems with the signature; it is written in pencil.

I am not famililar with any authenticated signature by Lizzie written in anything but ink.

The age of a writing with ink can be determined - you cannot determine the age of an inscription in pencll.

mbhenty · Post by **mbhenty** » Mon Jun 12, 2006 11:52 am

If the Lizzie signature was still attached to the autograph book along with signatures of here contemporaries or school friends and such, it would add great provenance to it. To collect a signature without anything to connect it to makes little sense in the aspect of value. Like writing your signature on a check or a plain sheet of paper. Which one would have more value?

Also by inspecting the other signatures it would help greatly to authenticate and validate Lizzie's signature. Sadly, the reason the signature was removed from the booklet could have been due to deliberate greed, selling the book for one value and Lizzie's signature for another.

Common practice for dealers trying to optimize their profit.

Even if it is verified that it is Lizzie's signature it would have little to no value to me, that is not to say that it is not of great worth on the collecting market. On the other hand, if it was Lizzie's signature written into, let's say, an old book of poems by Edgar Allan Poe, or any contemporary author in Lizzie's day, I would be prepared to bid over 1000 dollars for it.

So it was a big error to remove the page from the autograph book and I would have no interest in biding on the sellers table scraps even if it is the piece with the Jelly on it.

theebmonique · Post by **theebmonique** » Mon Jun 12, 2006 10:33 pm

Looks like someone felt it worthwhile to spend their $$'s on the signature...hmmm.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?Vi ... %3AIT&rd=1

Tracy...

mbhenty · Post by **mbhenty** » Tue Jun 13, 2006 10:46 am

Yes Tracy: I did not mean to imply that it was worthless, just that it was
compromised to an extent that would leave very little interest for me.

On the market it still has value, as a collector, very little to me. If you notice under the high bidders ID under "ME," that the high bidder is a dealer. (selling Civil War) Perhaps he already has a customer or is planning to resell it. Will look attractive in a dealer's shop in his glass case along with General Lee's signature. Sit on it long enough and the right customer will surly come along.

But, ehhh! I would feel cheated if I was to bid on an item that was torn away from it's original book.

theebmonique · Post by **theebmonique** » Tue Jun 13, 2006 10:53 am

Sorry Michael...I didn't think you meant anything negative at all. I wouldn't have wanted to bid on it either with it's lack of provenance. I am not anexpert in the area of signatures, but as others have said...it just didn't seem like Lizzie's signature.

Tracy...

mbhenty · Post by **mbhenty** » Tue Jun 13, 2006 10:59 am

No, no Tracy, no apology needed. Just a little friendly muscle flexing at your expense, but true, without the original book and other signatures it makes it that more difficult to verify Lizzies signature.