Was Andrew Shaved?

Lenore · Post by **Lenore** » Wed Jun 08, 2005 4:49 pm

Tracy, may I suggest you expend your energies discussing topics pertaining to Lizzie Borden and refrain from wasting so much time judging and criticizing others?

theebmonique · Post by **theebmonique** » Wed Jun 08, 2005 5:29 pm

I would like to most sincerely apologize to Lenore and anyone else for any misunderstandings which have occurred regarding my recent comments(posts) about citing sources, relaxing, taking time for one's self, or anthing else which may have come across as offensive and/or critical. I am very sorry.

Tracy...

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Wed Jun 08, 2005 7:02 pm

Well, you shouldn't have to take the brunt of any displeasue about standards we try to uphold here.
Anyone can be asked to cite a source at any time- but not capriously, hopefully. Meaning, it's not to become a punishment. (Which has happened to me, BTW)

Usually when there are new members it takes a bit of adjustment at both ends- but I do see some people get a bit miffed over sources. I don't know why.
If they read the archives before posting, they should be familiar with our requirements.
I think what might happen sometimes is that while they are lurking reading us, they are getting to know us, and when they first post they feel like we know them but we don't.
So usually I like to promote an Introduction phase and getting to meet someone first, just like in a social setting- but just starting talking can be somewhat confusing at first.

Susan · Post by **Susan** » Wed Jun 08, 2005 9:37 pm

Kat @ Wed Jun 08, 2005 2:00 am wrote:I asked Bill Pavao about that stove from testimony and he was pretty convinced it was the one stored there from Andrew's bedroom when he converted it from a kitchen. I would guess that you made a good stab at that one, Susan!

There was a box-like water tank in Bridget's closet and it was about the size of a double breadbox- the kind where there's a shelf in it to make it taller rather than wider. It's wood. I did post a picture. It would be March a year ago "Trip" thread.
I was wondering if that was what this lady was describing to the member here.

Thanks, Kat. How odd to store the stove in the attic, why not put it in the barn or sell it or something. I'm thinking that thing was cast iron and must have weighed a ton and to carry it up more stairs just to let it sit and gather dust. Unless Andrew had the idea that one day he might move and remake the house into two flats and want the stove close at hand.

Hmm, went on a search in the archives and couldn't find your trip pictures, would like to see the water tank pic again.

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Thu Jun 09, 2005 1:39 am

Well, figure up one stairway, rather than down 2. (Counting the side steps).

I couldn't find it either. Here it is. I left in Bill's hands and the back of my head (the old me) for perspective.
This is in Bridget's closet.

Haulover · Post by **Haulover** » Thu Jun 09, 2005 9:15 am

i don't recall seeing that photograph. i'm seeing it in artistic terms. it has a great ambiguity about it. what does one think if you know nothing of what it is about? is that a living head or just hair? visually you can see the arm as belonging to the head--but then it's a left arm. even the little triangle in the upper left is a nice detail. you can see it's a closet -- but what in the world is going on? (Cousin It and Thing meet in the closet?)

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Thu Jun 09, 2005 5:11 pm

Oh thanks a lot Eugene. You must have been watching scary movies lately.

You can also deduce that the nail had come out of the wall just as we moved some costumes aside to get a better view of the tank. Basically Stef snapped the picture as the clothes rod was coming down!

Susan · Post by **Susan** » Thu Jun 09, 2005 7:52 pm

Thanks, Kat. Wow, I saw the big hole in the wall and that you were holding the clothes rod, but, didn't put 2 and 2 together. So, is it known for sure if that tank was there in the Borden's day? That float mechanism looks current and looks like the float you would find in a toilet tank. The float leads me to believe as water is used, the float goes down and more water fills in the tank. Could it be possible that that was a later addition and thats what it was; and old high flush toilet tank? Any evidence that there was some sort of hole in the floor for the waste pipe? How odd.

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Thu Jun 09, 2005 8:19 pm

Don't know if it helps any, but, in the Trial document Volume 2, page 1139 Hilliard on the stand, there is a reference to a water tank that is in a closet in Bridget's attic room. I believe Kat also posted a picture of it not too long ago. It looked rather small, I believe it was supposed to be the size of a shoe box? Anyhoo:

Q. Very well: we will except that.
A. Mr. Fleet and Mr. Desmond was in what was Miss Bridget's room, searching, and I went in there after I got through this other room. We searched that room all through, the bed and the clothing that was there. We also searched the water tank that is in that room---what I term as in by the clothes press. From there we came out and went in---I went into a room on the south side of the attic---of the building. I was in there searching; Officer Seaver was there; Mr. Jennings was in there, Dr. Dolan. We searched that room, all of the trunks, we looked at the stove, the inside of the stove, in fact, we searched everything that was in that room.

Well, you called it Susan (above quote), and Bill had backed that up last March, so I'm pretty confident it is what it is. I recall there was no top and it was lined with metal. I could stck my hand in and feel around, but only as high as I could reach. (I brought a flashlite and measuring tape but no stepladder!

Susan · Post by **Susan** » Thu Jun 09, 2005 8:24 pm

Thanks, Kat. So, did it look as though there were pipes coming out of it somewhere that perhaps lead downstairs. Or was there any sort of hole where a pipe once was attached? It is so intriguing!

Tina-Kate · Post by **Tina-Kate** » Thu Jun 09, 2005 8:30 pm

Trial, page 1139 -- Hilliard (being cross examined by Robinson): "Mr. Fleet and Mr. Desmond was in what was Miss Bridget's room searching...We also searched the water tank that is in that room--what I term is a clothes press."

john · Post by **john** » Thu Jun 09, 2005 10:46 pm

The bowl sounds like B.S. to me. If I were going up a stairs with water I would use a pitcher so as not to spill, and a pitcher would have been empty in Mr. Borden's room if he needed a bowlfull, and the bowl must have belonged there too.
Did the autopsy mention whether he was shaved or not? It seems shaving that day would only be important to the guy who was trying to sell the gold andrew mug.
To imply that Andrew could clean up after killing Abby with a bowl of water is superflous. What would he do with the water - throw it out the window? What if someone saw him doing that? It takes a lot of water to wash off blood - a bowl would just be starters.
Stories abound.
I think Andrew may have picked up the lock just because workmen don't throw away their junk. The story about Andrew's safe taking two days to break into is bunko. I could get into a vault in about two hours and a safe would take half an hour if i couldn't obscound it or better drill it. So could any locksmith which they must have consulted.
So Andrew killing Abby seems unlikely, although he may have been the one who had her killed because he was the man with the money, and then got in too deep and got killed himself. Lizzie could have left the house during their money negotiations about it, and that was why the killer hung around - to get the money. So Lizzie comes back, knowing the deal, and finds Andrew dead - shock city! It has to be remembered that if Lizzie supposedly hired some to kill kill anyone, she had very little disposable income - like a couple hundred bucks would be all, and to say to a killer, "well I'll give you $ 20,000 in a year or so," doesn't jibe with crooks.
I would have no idea why Andrew would have wanted Abby dead - she sounded pretty nice to me, but strange things happen.
Could just be that old axiom, he who lives by the bow will die by the arrow.

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Thu Jun 09, 2005 11:39 pm

You know, the bowl does sound awkward. I hadn't thought of that. He would use a pitcher. Maybe his pitcher didn't fit under the kitchen sink fawcet? As in maybe that sink wasn't deep enough for it to fit but a shallow bowl would?

I guess I will get out the info as to how long the safe took to open. I think it's in the Witness Statements under Harrington?

As to a hired hit, wouldn't the person strip Andrew's pockets in case he wasn't paid right away? I think he would. Andrew had a lot of money on him.

Something I took note of in reading Emma's will today:

"TWELFTH: I give and bequeath all the rest and residue of the property, real and personal, over which I have any power of testamentary disposition at the time of my decease, to said B.M.C. Durfee Safe Deposit and Trust Company of Fall River, Massachusetts, and to said Preston H. Gardner of Providence, Rhode Island, hereinafter called my said trustees, IN TRUST, nevertheless, to invest the same and keep the same invested, and to collect all of the income thereof, and after paying from such income all expenses of administering this trust properly chargeable to income, to pay from the net income (in quarterly payments) the annual sum of Two Hundred Dollars ($200) to my cousin, Joseph Luther Morse, if and so long as he shall survive me and divide the remaining or net income (as the same is hereinafter defined) into five (5) equal shares, and to pay the same over bi-annually, or oftener as in the discretion of my said trustees they may deem best, in the manner and for the purposes hereinafter set forth."

--I haven't quite figured out why she would split the share 5 ways and then bring it back together 2x a year...but still why single him out? Did he do something for her? The context is that the Gardners were singled out and then so is this Morse- as relatives- and Lizzie was accounted for as well.

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Thu Jun 09, 2005 11:53 pm

Witness Statements
Pg. 15
"Thursday 11, 1892."
...
"He left Boston for home at 8.30 A. M. I went again to Police Headquarters, and with a detective went to the Diebold (?) Safe Co. No. 72 Sudbury street. From there a mechanic accompanied me home. At 3.15 P. M. in company with A. J. Jennings went to open the safe. I remained there until relieved by the District Attorney at about 5. P. M."
____

"Friday 12, 1892. Harrington. At the Borden house all forenoon assisting on the safe."

--Note- This is the following week.

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Fri Jun 10, 2005 3:45 am

I made a big mistake on Emma's will. (I was a bit distracted- sorry).

In Rebello, there is a gap with a profile of Joseph Morse and then the will takes up again. It's situated so that the specifications of the 5 shares comes after it. They do not pertain to Joseph. So he is only getting this total $200 yearly annuity, quarterly.

It should read:
"... Joseph Luther Morse, if and so long as he shall survive me and divide the remaining or net income (as the same is hereinafter defined) into five (5) equal shares, and to pay the same over bi-annually, or oftener as in the discretion of my said trustees they may deem best, in the manner and for the purposes hereinafter set forth.

(a) To pay one of such equal shares to the Trustees of the Fall River High School Alumni Scholarships to be used and applied by said last mentioned trustees in the following manner: Such share shall be used to establish and to provide for "The Andrew J. Borden Scholarships" each scholarship to be of such amount not exceeding the sum of Three Hundred Dollars ($300) per annum as said trustees shall determine; and 1 direct that such scholarships shall be awarded and given annually by said trustees one-half in aggregate amount thereof to such deserving male graduate or graduates and the other one-half thereof to such deserving female graduate or graduates of the High Schools of Fall River as they, in their discretion, shall select, such scholarship to be used to assist such graduates to secure advanced education. In the selection and appointment of such scholarships it is my desire (as printed on will) that preference shall be given to any graduate who may be named by Miss Julia A. Reed of said Fall River, or by said Orrin A. Gardner of said Touisset, during the lifetime of either of them."
etc. thru b,c,d,e.

There goes Emma's payoff to her cousin!

john · Post by **john** » Fri Jun 10, 2005 3:53 am

You are so very nice Kat!

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Fri Jun 17, 2005 5:07 am

You know, I am thinking about that postmortem picture of the examination of Andrew's body- I was looking at it colorized- and he has a beard! And it's scraggly, around his neck and ear. It doesn't look like he's shaved or been shaved in a couple of days.

john · Post by **john** » Sun Jun 19, 2005 6:26 pm

Nice and wise.

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Mon Jun 20, 2005 1:26 am

Thanks.

Lookyou guys at Andrew's jawline and neck.
Then some guy here can say how long it takes to get like that.

http://www.lizzieandrewborden.com/Crime ... Borden.htm

john · Post by **john** » Mon Jun 20, 2005 5:55 am

Hi Lenore.

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Mon Jun 20, 2005 6:21 pm

Did anybody go look?
Does it look like he was shaved?
If he's got a beard and its scraggly, he only needs his upper lip and maybe a bit of cheekbone shaved. Why would he pay for that in the middle of the week? A Thursday.

theebmonique · Post by **theebmonique** » Mon Jun 20, 2005 6:58 pm

I've looked, several times even, but of course I am no expert in having a beard. It looks a little 'scruffy' to me, but I don't know if the is the quality of the photo, or if it is dried blood or what.

Tracy...

Susan · Post by **Susan** » Mon Jun 20, 2005 7:42 pm

Hmmm, I thought that I posted to your original question on Friday, Kat, but, I guess I didn't hit the submit button? Anyway, I had checked out the post mortem photo of Andrew and thought that maybe it was a good question for the guys, is it easy to shave off your mustache and your throat and keep a clean line for your beard? Or, easier to have someone do it for you? Because if Andrew was shaved, he didn't have all that much shaved off of his face. But, trying to use one of those straight razors, brrrrr, I get chills just thinking about it! My legs would probably end up looking something like the back of Abby's head!

Tina-Kate · Post by **Tina-Kate** » Mon Jun 20, 2005 8:19 pm

Hard to tell of anything in all that mess. However, the bottom of his beard does look quite evenly trimmed, in spite of the length. You can esp see this in the photo that shows the opened body. Also, if he had just a beard but no moustache (like Morse), he might have had his upper lip shaved...altho you can't tell that at all from the photos.

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Tue Jun 21, 2005 12:09 am

Oh I thought it looked scraggly.
Thanks for checking you girls.

john · Post by **john** » Tue Jun 21, 2005 4:29 am

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

Allen · Post by **Allen** » Tue Jun 21, 2005 11:39 am

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

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Tue Jun 21, 2005 8:00 pm

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.

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Thu Jun 23, 2005 10:20 pm

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.

Susan · Post by **Susan** » Fri Jun 24, 2005 8:00 pm

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.

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Sat Jun 25, 2005 1:24 am

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?

Nancie · Post by **Nancie** » Sun Jun 26, 2005 4:27 pm

yet there was water to the barn?

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Sun Jun 26, 2005 4:45 pm

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.

john · Post by **john** » Mon Jun 27, 2005 7:57 am

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.

Susan · Post by **Susan** » Mon Jun 27, 2005 8:46 pm

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?

Allen · Post by **Allen** » Mon Jun 27, 2005 9:09 pm

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.

Nancie · Post by **Nancie** » Mon Jun 27, 2005 10:23 pm

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)?

Allen · Post by **Allen** » Mon Jun 27, 2005 11:00 pm

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.

Nancie · Post by **Nancie** » Mon Jun 27, 2005 11:45 pm

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?

Audrey · Post by **Audrey** » Tue Jun 28, 2005 12:00 am

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

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Tue Jun 28, 2005 4:44 am

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.

Allen · Post by **Allen** » Tue Jun 28, 2005 9:57 am

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?

Nancie · Post by **Nancie** » Tue Jun 28, 2005 7:02 pm

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!

Susan · Post by **Susan** » Tue Jun 28, 2005 8:27 pm

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.

Tina-Kate · Post by **Tina-Kate** » Tue Jun 28, 2005 9:00 pm

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?!

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Wed Jun 29, 2005 1:11 am

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

Susan · Post by **Susan** » Wed Jun 29, 2005 2:46 am

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"?

Tina-Kate · Post by **Tina-Kate** » Wed Jun 29, 2005 10:28 pm

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.

Tina-Kate · Post by **Tina-Kate** » Wed Jun 29, 2005 10:40 pm

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...

Liz Crouthers · Post by **Liz Crouthers** » Thu Jun 30, 2005 11:42 am

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?