Lizzie Borden Society Forum

Autopsy reports state shaved or unshaved or partially shaved body. It is part of analysis. So what was it?

I went back through Andrew's autopsy report, and thought I didn't find anything about him being shaved, I did find this bit of information that I had never noticed before. Andrew had a hernia. I wonder what kind of implications this had on his health, and what kind of issues it raised for him at the time. Was he taking any sort of medication for it? Bromo caffeine was supposed to be the equivalent of aspirin, maybe he had taken this for pain or discomfort? This could also be the reason he and Abby never had children. If Andrew was prone to suffer from hernias during their marriage it could have possibly caused sterility or sexual dysfunction.

Autopsy of Andrew J. Borden:

Inguinal hernia on right side. Abdomen had already been opened.


http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/tuto ... l%20hernia'

http://www.mayoclinic.com/invoke.cfm?ob ... 65&si=2765

http://www.netdoctor.co.uk/diseases/fac ... hernia.htm

Witness Statements
pg. 42

"ALBERT E. CHASE

Fall River, Mass. August 5, 1892. The following articles and wearing apparel were this afternoon taken from a washtub in the cellar wash room of the Borden House by orders of the City Marshal and Medical Examiner, and were buried under my direction in the yard back of the barn.
1 sofa pillow and tidy, one large piece of Brussels carpet, one roll of cotton batting, one sheet and several pieces of cotton cloth, three towels, one napkin, one chemise, one dress, one pair drawers, one skirt, two aprons, one hair braid and several pieces of hair from Mrs. Borden’s head from five to eight inches long, one neck tie, one truss, one piece of black silk braid or watch guard.

I also found mixed in with the hair of Mrs. Borden a piece of bone, which from it nature I took to be a piece of Mrs. Borden’s skull, it was cut so smooth, that I thought it might be of use in determining what kind of instrument was used, as the bone and hair both had the appearance of being cut with a very sharp instrument; I gave this piece of bone to Dr. Dolan.

About the middle of the next week Dr. Dolan ordered all the articles dug up. After taking out pieces of clothing and of the carpet, they were ordered buried again. This time they were all put in a box."

--I asked around about this and heard a lot depended on the extent of the *injury*. A male doctor told me that a hernia could be lived with without much discomfort with a truss. It was not uncommon. I made sure he knew it was a case in 1892.

That sink.
I've been trying to find out about the sink supposedly in Andrew's part of the second floor.
I talked to Bill Pavao, who was resident curator at the house for a couple of years. He reccomended I check the Kieran floor plan of 1892/93. It was a good suggestion because he had used it in his analysis and it is accessible in Agnes de Mille's "A Dance of Death."
He said as he recalled there was a sink there. And there was. He also said it didn't seem reasonable that Andrew would have any pipes removed which serviced that sink if he kept the sink- which we have proof he did keep it.
It's still a question as to whether there was a pump there still until "recently." I don't know the source of any water that might be there.

Could the pipes actually tap into the old well in front of the barn? That would explain why Andrew didn't use the pump in that sink if the well was dry in 1892.

If he was washing his teeth in the kitchen sink, and bringing water upstairs in a bowl, then that sink probaby no longer had any water pumped to it after the city water was put in downstairs and the well closed, right? It could still drain tho, maybe?

yet there was water to the barn?

Well, there was water to the cellar laundry sink and water to the *necessary* down there and water to the barn was probably for taking care of the horse? That's a good question tho. Maybe there was more use to the barn than we know?

I still don't know about getting the pressure to get the water up to the second floor- either by City water or by handpump. I was told that's a tough question.

A normal man would definately shave with hot water, and since Andrew had a mug at the barber shop, he was probably used to this luxury. We don't know that Andrew didn't take a pan of water up stairs every morning, perhaps just his way of doing things.
If Andrew had something important to do that morning most likely he would have shaved, and seems like he didn't shave.

Kat @ Sun Jun 26, 2005 2:45 pm wrote:Well, there was water to the cellar laundry sink and water to the *necessary* down there and water to the barn was probably for taking care of the horse? That's a good question tho. Maybe there was more use to the barn than we know?

I still don't know about getting the pressure to get the water up to the second floor- either by City water or by handpump. I was told that's a tough question.

We know that the Bordens had some sort of water tank in the attic, in Bridget's room, though it looks small. I wonder if that was just an immediate supply tank and that there was a larger one somewhere in the attic at one time? I found this, don't know if helps with that second floor hand pump:

"By the middle of the 1870's, it was expected that a fashionable house would have running water and an indoor bathroom. This was generally accomplished by placing a large water tank in the attic (usually lead lined -- one reason the average life span was shorter back then). So, the decorative towers much favored by the Victorians often served a double purpose: exterior drama, and a place to put the water tank. Frank Lloyd Wright disdained attics in general, proclaiming them to be "useless", but with all due respect to this doyen of American architects, go fly a kite. The attic in an 1875 Second Empire house was not "useless". Without electric pumps, how else could you have running water on demand?

One water pipe usually ran down to a boiler in the kitchen, where it could be heated. Victorian bathrooms were virtually always located on the second floor and near the back of the house. This served an esthetic purpose -- Victorians definitely believed that bathrooms should be neither seen nor heard -- and also placed the bathroom so that water pressure from the attic could conveniently supply the bathtub by pushing hot water up from the kitchen boiler. The flush toilets of the era also worked off gravity, utilizing flush compartments that were placed as high as eight feet above the toilet, and activated by a long pull chain.

How did they fill the attic water tank in the first place? Well, with a little luck, from rain water. Gutters were used to funnel rain water into the tank (which were built to hold as much as 600 gallons), and if the weather failed, the well-to-do could always depend upon wells and servants with buckets or hand pumps."

From this site: http://users.rcn.com/scndempr/dave/essay.html

Could it be that the second floor was supplied by this saved water only at one time?



I also found this, though the question is about pumping water up from a deep well, could it not work also for pumping from a well on the ground to a second floor of a house?

"Do you sell or know a source for hand pumps that pump from deeper wells?"
Sorry but what we show is all that we sell as far as hand pumps. Pumps for deeper wells can get very complicated and they require a two-pipe system."

From this site: http://www.plumbingworld.com/handpump.html

Could there have been, or still be in the walls some sort of two-pipe system for that hand pump that was supposed to be on the second floor?

Kat @ Sat Jun 25, 2005 1:24 am wrote:If he was washing his teeth in the kitchen sink, and bringing water upstairs in a bowl, then that sink probaby no longer had any water pumped to it after the city water was put in downstairs and the well closed, right? It could still drain tho, maybe?

I tend to agree with Kat. I don't think it was in service at the time they lived there. Otherwise, he probably would not have been brushing his teeth in the sink downstairs, he would've done it upstairs in that sink. He could also have filled up the pitcher from the sink upstairs. It is interesting that the information in Susan's post says the bathroom was usually on the second floor, and at the back of the house, because they believed they should be neither seen nor heard. This could be the reason it was put in the cellar in the Borden home.

I find this very interesting, thanks Susan for the
research on the pumps. We had a pump like that
at our summer cottage here at the shore, and I remember my Dad constantly working on it. I wonder if Andrew was a handy-type guy around the
house and tended to these things, we don't know that about him but he must have been (had to have
been or hired someone)?

Nancie @ Mon Jun 27, 2005 10:23 pm wrote: I wonder if Andrew was a handy-type guy around the
house and tended to these things, we don't know that about him but he must have been (had to have
been or hired someone)?

That is an interesting question Nancie. I had never thought about that before. Sure Andrew had the money to hire someone to take care of fixing things, but as thrifty as he was he may have found it more cost effective to try and fix things himself. Was he a handy man at fixing things? Or maybe he thought a man of his station shouldn't trouble himself with things like this? That's really interesting, and it adds a whole new demention to how I try and picture him.

Plus he had his farm in Swansea, quite a lot to tend to. We know he was a hardworking man to achieve his financial position, he must have been just as hardworking in his property to keep everything up in the cheapest manner possible?

He did not start off rich-- and he embraced thrist. I imagine if he could fix/do it-- he did!

I never thought of Andrew as a handy-man. Maybe he was.
I also didn't think about the need for Hot water to shave. I think there was hot water on the stove- well I take that back- the hot water reference I think is from the "Secret Grand Jury."

I just saw on Court TV (I think) about a small town life in Kentucky and the men still gathered at the barber shop to get the gossip and financial news and since it was Kentucky they also played banjoes and guitars, ala Andy Griffith.

I thought last night after signing off about the broken lock. What was his purpose for picking it up? Maybe he was going to tinker with it and try to fix it?

coincidence Melissa, I thought the same thing about
the lock, and how Andrew was "that type of guy"
to fix things rather than buy new. We could probably come up with a lot of examples of this,
his collecting eggs etc. It must have drove Lizzie
crazy!

Didn't Andrew start out in life as a furniture maker, he must have been pretty handy when it came to tools.

I'm still thinking about the running water at #92, that must have been so nice going from those hand pumps to just turning a faucet! I assume Nancie has, but, has anyone ever tried working one of those things? My neighbors had a hand pump in the middle of their backyard with what I assume was a horse trough under the spout. It was alot of work for a little water.

Thanks for those quotes Susan, which I found interesting. However, I was by coincidence looking at my book of Victorian house floor plans a few days ago & I noticed some errors in that article. I wish I had the technical ability to share some of these here as they're fascinating.

Quote: "This was generally accomplished by placing a large water tank in the attic...So, the decorative towers much favored by the Victorians...a place to put the water tank." I beg to differ--I have not yet seen a floor plan that places a water tank in a turret. Also, there is no structural advantage of placing one in a turret as opposed to anywhere else above the 1st floor.

Quote: "Victorian bathrooms were virtually always located on the second floor and near the back of the house..." This is incorrect as a generalization. I've seen as many bathrooms located in the middle of second floor plans as I have seen in the back of them. Also, I have seen tanks and even tank "rooms" located on the 2nd floor, even when the plan included attic space. The author also contradicts himself here--the turrets were located on the front & sides of a house, so what good would that do for the bathroom which was "virtually always" located at the back?!

I thought the owners of the first bathrooms were very proud of the innovation and showed them off! But I figured what do I know about Victorian bathrooms, overall

Thanks, Tina-Kate. I knew some of the material was off, like the turret thing. I've never been in a Victorian home with a tower that ever had a water tank in it yet. I was trying to find info on what was done water-wise in a two story home before city (running) water was brought in, like in the Borden home. From what I've read about most Victorian homes that weren't built with bathrooms, they were put in where they had room to spare for it. But, this was usually done in what was considered family space, such as the second floor, not in what was considered public space like on the first floor. Unless, of course, if it was a one story home. But, I always wonder, what did a visitor of such a home do when they needed to use the "facilities"?

In some of the floorplans I was looking at, the architects took space from servant's rooms for the tank room. (The injustice!) That reminded me of Bridget! The book of plans I have are all late 1890s, & yet, there were *still* several houses with no bathrooms at all! I remember as a kid visiting a friend who lived in a Victorian down the street (close to where I live now) & was shocked to see a bathroom the size of a bedroom, with a sofa in it & everything...obviously a house built without, & a bedroom was used when it came time to install a bathroom. Funny thing about this book tho...all the bathrooms had the toilet in one room with the tub & sink, altho some had "lavs" where there was only a washbasin. I've seen a lot of Victorians myself that have had the toilet in a virtual "closet" (hence WC) with a separate room for tub & sink (also very common in older homes in England). Good question re guests using the facilities. I guess a no-brainer if there's an outhouse. But I suppose otherwise, they asked to use a chamber pot. This brings lots of other things to mind, like--did they have an euphemism to ask such a favor? Were they expected to dump 'n rinse as a courtesy, esp in cases where there was no poor servant who got stuck doing it? Did they have to drag the pot into a closet or empty room to do their business...etc etc etc.

Almost forgot--my sister lives in a 1904 farmhouse. The bathroom is a converted butler's pantry! Imagine putting a butler's pantry between the dining room & kitchen (an extravagance IMO) & yet not putting in a proper bathroom! I'm always uncomfortable "going" there, as there are two doors to make sure are closed & they have a habit of keeping the one to the dining room open(!) & only the door to the kitchen has a lock...

Well my butler's pantry is as big as a small bathroom so I guess they used what they could. Is it odd to have a butler's pantry between the kitchen and dining room, that's the way it is at my house?

the butler's pantry at my house was between the
kitchen and dining room, with a sink, just a hallway
really. Lots of cabinets. Funny Tina Kate!

The butler's pantry is generally located between the kitchen & dining room. I was just thinking it was strange to have that, but not a bathroom. To me, things like butler's pantries seem more "upwardly mobile city" as opposed to "hardworking farmer's home". However, it is quite a large & nice house, so I'm sure the farm was prosperous. When I thought about it more -- they still have the old hand pump (like the one Susan posted) outside & lovingly well-maintained (altho not used). Perhaps indoor plumbing was just too awkward & expensive for them to install at that time. Certainly the hand pump survived down the generations to my sister's partner (always been in his family)...I'm guessing it was used for a long time. I should ask about it next time I'm out that way.

I grew up in a home in which plumbing was added hundreds of years after the place was built...

We all had huge bathrooms attached to our bedrooms... They were once dressing rooms and we had furniture in them! The "wc" is almost always separate in older homes-- New homes/renovates are more American in design.

I have never seen a Butler's Pantry that was not between the kitchen and dining room.

They were designed as a place to store serving platters, bowls and dinner ware and silverware.

Some of us are still stuck on the question about where guests went to the bathroom!
Here you can borrow my chanber pot?
What about when one was downtown shopping and the urge struck? What about groceries and banks?

Kat @ Fri Jul 01, 2005 4:58 am wrote:Some of us are still stuck on the question about where guests went to the bathroom!
Here you can borrow my chanber pot?
What about when one was downtown shopping and the urge struck? What about groceries and banks?

**Tansatlantic call**

According to my grandmother (Yes, she is still alive-- and she is now 92)

"Oh, Mon Dieu.... You just had to come home"

And.. Most people had chamber pots in bedrooms-- including the guest room.

a good way to keep visits short

So do you mean that guests were sent to the guest room to use the chamber pot? It's not just a bedroom for when people come and stay- it's also the visitor's bathroom?
Thank you for calling your grand-mere!

She had chamber pots that a person could actually sit on!

They were more or less commodes and had removable china inserts and lids... They sat right out in plain sight and appeared as a piece of furniture. Of course everyone knew what they really were. Some hapless servant would have to empty them... Where? I was afraid to ask!

Of course the French have always loved toilet humor...

Thanks, Audrey. I still wonder what the proper Victorian etiquette was for this, did you just out and ask, can I use your W.C.? Just excuse yourself and ask the servant where the facilities were?

When I was a kid in the 30s and 40s, most of my rural relatives didn't have indoor plumbing, even though in some cases their homes were quite nice. I have the feeling that people used to believe it wasn't quite "nice" to have a toilet actually in the house. As someone else posted, each bedroom had a chamber pot or sometimes just a slop pail. If one was visiting and had to "go" in the daytime, one went to the outhouse, just as the family members did. If it was night, the visitor could still grab a lantern or flashlight and visit the outhouse. Long ago I posted a story about going to the outhouse at night with my girlfriend, who lived in the country. She set the flashlight down and it rolled into the hole. We could see it still shining pluckily down there, and she said, "I have to get that flashlight back, or my Daddy will kill me!" I allowed as how she wasn't going to get any help from me. As far as I know, that flashlight is still down there. (No, her Daddy didn't kill her, although he did look pretty grim when she told him.)

They used to empty their pots into the streets!

In some cases, from a window... Which is where the term came from. (a pot to pee in or a window to throw it out of)

As far as those puritanical times.. I do not know! We exposed our table legs in France and then there is the whole décolletage thing!

I read recently that not only were furniture legs often covered up as they were seen as "provocative", but the word "leg(s)" itself was considered too risque, and one referred only to "the lower limbs". Thanks for the story, Edisto. I'm thinking now that farms probably did not have flush toilets, baths, etc back around the turn of the century. Being on wells probably made things very complicated. Just the hand pumps for maybe the kitchen sink & pumps outside to service the animals' needs. I'm still wondering a bit about the guest toilet stuff in the Victorian era, however. European customs were very different. The commodes would have only been for those with ample means. Certainly not everyone would have a servant for the dirty work, either. Around 1892, there was a big concern for sanitation (did someone post something like this recently?) & I suppose the very poor (AJB's tennants?) might dump the waste into the urban jungle, but the toilet-less middle class would be like AJB dumping in the garden, or down the privy. Perhaps those who could not afford maids had outhouses & the guests used those instead of imposing themselves upon the chamber pots.

I noticed this recently in The Evening Standard, "Did She Or Didn't She?", New Bedford, Aug. 11, 1892:

"Water Main. --A water main 1100 feet in length is being laid in Shawmut avenue, north of Durfee street. People in that section have endeavored to have water pipes laid in their street for years, but not until recently was the work ordered, as some of the abutters on the street hated to do away with their wells. But the improvement was started yesterday afternoon."