Lizzie's dress

[Allen]

My idea is that Lizzie was not an experienced murderer. She may not have known what to expect at all.

I agree with that observation 100%, I've stated that many times. She wasn't experienced because she had never done it before. As I have stated in the past I think this also explains the incredible overkill as well. In the heat of the moment, an inexperienced killer may panic and would not know how many blows with the hatchet it would take to actually kill someone. Once she had reached the point of no return there was no going back, and she probably just wanted to make good and sure they were dead.


1bigsteve Wed Feb 08, 2006 12:12 pm

Did Lizzie have enough time from the day she couldn't buy cyanide to the morning of the murders to make a "covering?" She said she was up in her room sewing something on something on the morning of the murders. Maybe she was just putting the finishing touches on her "costume?"

It's stated by Knowlton that he intended to show that Lizzie had tried unsuccessfully to buy prussic acid on at least one occasion before trying to buy it from Bence on the day before the murders. Unfortunately we never got to hear that evidence. Could she have started the dress after the first failed attempt? Could she have made the dress in case she was forced to take more drastic measures? And after all it didn't have to be perfect, just wearable. That's also an interesting point that she was sewing in her room that morning.

I found this in the Witness Statements on page 31:

Fall River August 5, 1892.

In accordance with instructions, I visited New Bedford. I find that Lizzie Borden arrived in that city on Thursday July 21rst, and went to Mrs. Poole's, the mother of a friend, a former schoolmate, living near South Water street. While there she never went out alone, always going in the company of the family, with the exception, that being Saturday morning July 23, when she went on the street to buy a piece of dress goods of some cheap material, being gone about 30 minutes. She went alone and returned alone.

[Audrey]

Now this could get very interesting!

See new thread!

[Kat]

Could the weapon have been a meat cleaver that was washed and put back in it's place? Hiding in plain sight? Could the weapon have been some other household object with a sharp edge? The police assumed it must have been a hatchet so it's possible they walked right past the real weapon.

--bigsteve

After the prosecution's experts cleaned the skulls and looked them over, the defense came and was closeted up with the skulls to examine them too. After they left, without word, Dr. Draper re-examined the skulls and found gilt in one of Abby's wound tracks.

Knowlton Papers
#HK203, May 31, 1893
"...The other discovery is still more important; on one of the cuts in Mrs. Borden's skull, near the right ear, there is
a very small but unmistakable deposit of the gilt metal with which hatchets are ornamented when they leave the factory; this deposit (Dr. Cheever confirmed the observation fully) means that the hatchet used in killing Mrs. Borden was a new hatchet, not long out of the store. Perhaps this is not new information either to you or Dr. Dolan; it was new to me and seemed important enough to justify immediate conveyance to you. The shining deposit can be seen with the naked eye; it is plainly visible with the use of a lens, when once its situation is indicated." etc.

This gilt pretty much rules out any kitchen implement, and possibly rules out any ironing flats.

[1bigsteve]

So it looks as though it had to be a hatchet. That narrows the field down for me.

Is it possible Lizzie bought a new hatchet in New Bedford when she was there buying the cheap fabric? Did the police investigate that and did the Fall River police check with the local hardware stores to see if Lizzie bought one? In the movie she is seen stealing one. Thats a possibility I guess.

Perhaps Andrew bought a new one to replace the broken handleless hatchet and that new one became the murder weapon?

-1bigsteve (o:

[Kat]

A friend/member here wrote me before that they had experience with hatchets which were new, used for 2 years, and some still retained some gilt. I suppose it depends on the wear and the sharpening. The thing which is more odd, is that no gilt was said to be found in Andrew's wounds.
Maybe his skull was better cleaned?
Or this might suggest a different weapon?
Or a different part of the blade was used because of the angle?

[1bigsteve]

Perhaps the gilt was all used up in Abby's wounds and Andrew's skull was cleaned too well and eliminated any smaller traces. I doubt two weapons were used. Possible if Lizzie was the killer. I can't see a hired killer lugging around a spare.

Was there any rust found in the wounds? Was the handless hatchet head rusty when it was found?

-1bigsteve (o:

[SallyG]

In reference to the idea of Lizzie using a paper pattern to shield herself from the blood spatter...paper patterns were being produced at that time, however they were generally made from tissue paper, which was light and easily folded for packaging. As someone who has been sewing since I was 12, I can tell you that one of those tissue paper patterns would not protect anyone from much of anythiing. They are easily torn, and blood would soak right through. One swing of the hatchet would have them in tatters. Also, patterns are pinned to double thicknesses of fabric to produce pieces for right and left. A pattern itself is about half the pieces needed for a whole garment. If Lizzie tried to pin pattern pieces together to make a paper dress, she'd find herself with only half a dress.

[Allen]

In reference to the idea of Lizzie using a paper pattern to shield herself from the blood spatter...paper patterns were being produced at that time, however they were generally made from tissue paper, which was light and easily folded for packaging. As someone who has been sewing since I was 12, I can tell you that one of those tissue paper patterns would not protect anyone from much of anythiing. They are easily torn, and blood would soak right through. One swing of the hatchet would have them in tatters. Also, patterns are pinned to double thicknesses of fabric to produce pieces for right and left. A pattern itself is about half the pieces needed for a whole garment. If Lizzie tried to pin pattern pieces together to make a paper dress, she'd find herself with only half a dress.

Thanks so much SallyG, that was really helpful information. Tissue paper is very thin and I don't see it being much of a shield from anything. Thanks for explaining that. Thinking of it as tissue paper helps give me a pretty good idea of what it would look and feel like, I love making all kinds of different craft items in my spare time and I've handled tissue paper on many occassions due to this hobby. I've also used it when wrapping gifts to line the boxes. It's pretty flimsy stuff. Plus you pointed out that she would have ended up with only half a dress.

[Audrey]

not much different from patterns today!

[Harry]

Regarding the dress pattern (of which I have only a vague idea of what one is) Lizzie had this say in her Inquest testimony (p88+) on August 11th:

"Q. Did you buy a dress pattern in New Bedford?
A. A dress pattern?
Q. Yes.
A. I think I did.
Q. Where is it?
A. It is at home.
Q. Where?
A. Where at home?
Q. Please.
A. It is in a trunk.
Q. In your room?
A. No, sir; in the attic.
Q. Not made up?
A. O, no, sir.
Q. Where did you buy it?
A. I don't know the name of the store.
Q. On the principal street there?
A. I think it was on the street that Hutchinson's book store is on. I am not positive.
Q. What kind of a one was it, please?
A. It was a pink stripe and a white stripe, and a blue stripe corded gingham."

It was not turned over to the police until the last day of the Preliminary hearing. This is from the Evening Standard of September 3rd:

"THAT DRESS PATTERN.
Was It Possible For Defence to Have
Duplicated the Goods?
Fall River, Sept. 3. --- The day after the Borden murder City Marshal Hilliard put two New Bedford officers at work in that city with orders to trace Lizzie Borden's actions during the two weeks previous. They found that she had purchased a dress pattern of cheap material in a dry goods store in that city, and it was to this pattern that reference was made at the trial. Some importance was attached to the matter at the time of the discovery of the purchase. The police failed to find the dress pattern or any dress of it in their search at the Borden house. They made demand on the members of the family to produce the piece of goods or the made-up dress. If they could not do this the police wanted to know what had become of it. The family refused to move in the matter and the police at New Bedford searched the store to get a sample of the goods bought by Lizzie. The last day of the trial the defence surrendered the piece of dress goods which Lizzie had purchased and it was still intact. The question has arisen in the minds of some people who believe as the prosecution does whether or not it was possible for the friends of the prisoner to have duplicated the dress pattern and surrendered the last purchased instead of the first, and that the first one might have been made-up and used by Lizzie Borden at the time of the murder and afterwards destroyed or put out of the way."

[1bigsteve]

Very interesting. I think the possible pieces are falling into place.

-1bigsteve (o:

[SallyG]

Interesting. I am beginning to think that when they say "dress pattern" they are not talking about an actual tissue paper pattern from which to cut the dress pieces, but the actual length of fabric itself. That may have been the terminology back then...whereas now we say "fabric", "dress pattern" may have indicated the actual fabric yardage itself, and "dress pattern" could have also meant "material suitable or designed to make a dress" as opposed to material suitable for sheets, underwear, nightgown, coat, etc. It sounds as if the length of material was pink, blue and white stripe. I'm still hesitant to think Lizzie might have quickly made up a dress. Cutting a length of material to make a dress, or any garment for that matter, is not a real quickie manuever. The material has to be laid out on a flat surface, a pattern has to be pinned to the fabric, it has to be cut. Lizzie making a dress would probably be noticed by other members of the family. Although we can't rule out that she may have used the length of fabric to "wrap" herself in, or use it as some sort of a shield, or even used it to "clean up" things after one or both of the murders. I can't say, knowing fabric as I do, that a length of material would be my first choice to shield myself from blood, but who knows. Strange, though, that the fabric seemed to have disappeared during the search. Then turned up again. Fabric for a dress back then would have necessitated about 8 to 10 yards or more, so it would not be something easily missed. Anyway, as I said, I think the dress pattern they were referring to was the actual fabric itself.

[1bigsteve]

That's exactly what I was thinking, Sally. Or maybe the sections of fabric were already cut out for a dress of a certain size and you just sewed the pre-cut sections together yourself?

Welcome to the forum, Sally!

-1bigsteve (o:

[SallyG]

Thank you! I've actually been here before, but when some changes were made a few months ago, I kinda got lost. Plus, like a numbskull, I forgot my password AND my sign-in name. So, I figured I'd start from scratch.

[Harry]

SallyG, can you explain just what a pattern consists of?

Is it like 1bigsteve says a fabric consisting of dress sections that you lay on top of the material that you are going to make the dress from and then trace the outline?

I can see your point about it being made of cheap material as it would be discarded after its use.

I'm used to seeing patterns usually consisting of squares and an outline drawn in them which was cut and then traced. Anything like that?

Oh yes, SallyG, welcome!

[SallyG]

That's exactly what I was thinking, Sally. Or maybe the sections of fabric were already cut out for a dress of a certain size and you just sewed the pre-cut sections together yourself?

Good thought, although I don't think something of that type would have been available back then. If women weren't experienced seamstresses, they had a dressmaker make their clothing. That seems to be what Lizzie did. Although she probably could make basic repairs, etc. And it's entirely possible she was able to use that "dress pattern" material to whip up a sort of gown or mumu type of garment on the sewing machine. That would have been relatively easy. Plus a head covering to tie around her hair. Just slip that outfit on, take care of business, take it off, clean up any spots on her skin..and get dressed again! However, that would take forethought, and planning. But, she still could have used that length of fabric for a toga type of thing. Wrap it, tie it, and she's off! Plus a head covering for good measure. Now she would have had to dispose of that fabric, though. It could have been burned in the stove. And since a dress would require several yards of fabric, she could have very well used a portion of that fabric to protect herself from blood, etc. Dispose of the soiled fabric in the stove, and still have a lot left over to produce at the hearing. Locating that fabric after the murders did seem to be a problem. I doubt more fabric would have been purchased after the murder, since the police did have a sample of the original fabric. And I think anyone in the family attempting to purchase more of the same pattern after the murders would have attracted some interest. I wonder IF the amount of fabric initially purchased, and the amount of fabric presented at trial was ever compared. Was there less fabric that what she initially purchased?

[SallyG]

SallyG, can you explain just what a pattern consists of?

Is it like 1bigsteve says a fabric consisting of dress sections that you lay on top of the material that you are going to make the dress from and then trace the outline?

I can see your point about it being made of cheap material as it would be discarded after its use.

I'm used to seeing patterns usually consisting of squares and an outline drawn in them which was cut and then traced. Anything like that?

You are exactly right. A pattern comes in an envelope, with several large sheets of tissue paper folded inside. On each sheet of tissue paper is several printed outlines. These outlines are the pattern pieces. They are cut out individually and placed on the folded fabric. They are then pinned down, the fabric is cut along the lines of the pattern piece, and the garment is ready to be sewn together. The tissue paper pattern pieces are unpinned, and the pieces are sewn together into the garment. The pattern pieces are frequently placed on the fold of the fabric, and when the pattern piece is cut from fabric, it is unfolded, and you have a section of the garment. That's what I meant by Lizzie having "half a dress" if she tried to use just pattern pieces.

Although I don't think Lizzie bought that material with the intent of using it during the murders. It might have just been handy. If she was planning a house dress or something of the sort, she may well have bought a cheaper piece of fabric to have made up into a dress. Lizzie may have very well been thrifty when it came to that sort of thing. She may have bought the more expensive lengths of fabric for street dresses.

[Harry]

Thank you SallyG. That's what my mind pictured them to be but I wasn't sure. I had seen woodworking projects done from patterns.

I assume then she could have simply not cut out the patterns but just used the material. And since it was a cheaper material it would have burned more easily and completely.

Another possibility is she already on hand a dress pattern when she bought the one in New Bedford. Wouldn't it be more likely to have more than one? Not the same pattern style but a different one. We know when the Bedford cord was made there were other dresses made at the same time.

Since Lizzie had her dresses made by a dressmaker who came to the house would it be Lizzie who provided the patterns or would she describe what she wanted and let the dressmaker take it from there?

Sorry for all the questions.

[SallyG]

Thank you SallyG. That's what my mind pictured them to be but I wasn't sure. I had seen woodworking projects done from patterns.

I assume then she could have simply not cut out the patterns but just used the material. And since it was a cheaper material it would have burned more easily and completely.

Another possibility is she already on hand a dress pattern when she bought the one in New Bedford. Wouldn't it be more likely to have more than one? Not the same pattern style but a different one. We know when the Bedford cord was made there were other dresses made at the same time.

Since Lizzie had her dresses made by a dressmaker who came to the house would it be Lizzie who provided the patterns or would she describe what she wanted and let the dressmaker take it from there?

I think when we think "pattern" we are thinking a tissue paper pattern used to make a dress. I am thinking the "dress pattern" that Lizzie bought was actually the fabric. As in "Lizzie bought a dress pattern"..translated to "Lizzie bought a few yards of fabric that is suitable for making a dress"

I think Lizzie, like most women, probably had a box of dress patterns. In fact, there may have been a box of dress patterns used by all three women. Patterns can be used over and over. And many, if not most, have variations on style so that one pattern envelope can be used to make 2-3 styles of dresses. Once a pattern was used, it would be refolded and put back in the envelope and back in the box, for future use.

The dressmaker most likely used one of the patterns that Lizzie wanted used for a certain length of fabric. Or Lizzie might have just told her "I want the dress to look like such and such, and such and such" And the dressmaker may have been skilled enough to do whatever she wanted with a minimal use of patterns.

Now if we are talking Lizzie having more than one "dress pattern", that is more than one length of fabric, yes, she may very well have had several lengths of fabric waiting to be made into dresses. The trunk in the attic may have held several lengths of fabric. The striped gingham she mentions may have been the latest piece purchased. Many times, I myself, will buy a piece of fabric, not having any particular plans for it but just because I like it, and will plan something for it later.

As far as the striped corded gingham burning...yes, gingham is a cotton fabric, it burns easily, smells like leaves burning, and the ash pretty much disentigrates. It is a lightweight, washable, stout fabric that is woven in checks, plaids or stripes.

And yes, Lizzie could very well have cut a length from the piece of corded gingham, which probably consisted of several yards for a dress, wrapped it toga style, with a piece tied around her head, and committed the murders, then cleaned up, dressed again, and shoved the piece of fabric in the stove. She would have still had more of the fabric left over to produce at the trial.

[Allen]

material it would have burned more easily and completely.

Another possibility is she already on hand a dress pattern when she bought the one in New Bedford. Wouldn't it be more likely to have more than one? Not the same pattern style but a different one. We know when the Bedford cord was made there were other dresses made at the same time.

Since Lizzie had her dresses made by a dressmaker who came to the house would it be Lizzie who provided the patterns or would she describe what she wanted and let the dressmaker take it from there?

Sorry for all the questions.

That's what I was going to ask. If we assume Lizzie was unable to sew together a dress, then why buy the dress material and dress pattern at all? That wouldn't make sense to me. If she bought it in New Bedford on the 23 of July, and the murders took place on August 4, thats a 12 day interval. Emma isn't at home during this time, so she isn't around to notice anything. Abby and Lizzie were not on good terms and Lizzie avoided her, and I doubt Andrew concerned himself with what Lizzie was actually doing most of the time. I think it would've been easy for her to get away with. She also had a lock on her bedroom door which was used frequently and without question as to why. The dress maker was only there about two weeks, and she sewed together at least two dresses for Lizzie. Even if Lizzie was a novice I think a 12 day interval gives her ample time to put something together. Also if she hadn't bought it with the intent of using it during the murders, then why did she buy it? Were they planning on having dresses made again in the near future? And why did the material disappear?

[Harry]

Thanks again, Sally. It's a lot clearer in my mind now.

[SallyG]

That's what I was going to ask. If we assume Lizzie was unable to sew together a dress, then why buy the dress material and dress pattern at all? That wouldn't make sense to me. If she bought it in New Bedford on the 23 of July, and the murders took place on August 4, thats a 12 day interval. Emma isn't at home during this time, so she isn't around to notice anything. Abby and Lizzie were not on good terms and Lizzie avoided her, and I doubt Andrew concerned himself with what Lizzie was actually doing most of the time. I think it would've been easy for her to get away with. She also had a lock on her bedroom door which was used frequently and without question as to why. The dress maker was only there about two weeks, and she sewed together at least two dresses for Lizzie. Even if Lizzie was a novice I think a 12 day interval gives her ample time to put something together. Also if she hadn't bought it with the intent of using it during the murders, then why did she buy it? Were they planning on having dresses made again in the near future? And why did the material disappear?

I would imagine women then, as now, perused magazines, available patterns, etc., with an eye to something they'd like to have made in the future. I wouldn't imagine it would be uncommon for women to pick up patterns for future use, or to have on hand when the dressmaker came. Just because they liked the style.

I agree, even if Lizzie was not good at sewing, she could probably still could have put together some sort of garment to cover herself. The sewing machine was in the guest bedroom. And Abby might have wondered what she was sewing up on the machine. However, Lizzie still could have put together something in her bedroom, sewing by hand. Sewing by hand takes time, though...which she had. She was alone up there, and she had the time to hand sew some sort of covering.

I'm not sure if she actually bought the material with the intention of using it during the murders. It seems that Lizzie may have really intended to poison Andrew and Abby. The attempt to purchase the prussic acid was made shortly before the murders. That makes it seem that the idea to do them in was a pretty recent thought. Buying the material 12 days in advance, and taking the time to put something together by hand takes a lot more advanced planning. I really don't think Lizzie really intended to use the hatchet. I think it was a very last resort.

There might have been a thought of having the dressmaker in in the near future, and Lizzie might have picked up the fabric with that in mind. Since it was cheap, it was probably intended for some sort of housedress, not something to go out on the streets in.

I can't figure out why the material disappeared for a time, though. That one has me puzzled.

[Harry]

... I can't figure out why the material disappeared for a time, though. That one has me puzzled.

We are assuming that what was turned in was in the house when the police searched. If Lizzie had used what she had bought, burned it, and Emma, while Lizzie was locked up, had slipped out and bought a similar dress pattern and used that to turn over to the police, it would explain why the police didn't find it in their search.

From the newspaper article it appears the police were putting pressure on Emma to produce the pattern that Lizzie bought. Unable to find it she may have simply bought a similar one. Pure speculation though.

Lizzie in her Inquest statement seems a bit startled that she was asked about the pattern. If not startled at least not expecting it. She drags out the question as if trying to gather her thoughts.

[SallyG]

We are assuming that what was turned in was in the house when the police searched. If Lizzie had used what she had bought, burned it, and Emma, while Lizzie was locked up, had slipped out and bought a similar dress pattern and used that to turn over to the police, it would explain why the police didn't find it in their search.

From the newspaper article it appears the police were putting pressure on Emma to produce the pattern that Lizzie bought. Unable to find it she may have simply bought a similar one. Pure speculation though.

According to the newspaper article, when the police requested the material, the family failed to produce it, so the police went to the store where it was bought and got a sample of it. Apparently, the store kept records of who bought what. I would assume they also kept a record of how much was bought. The small fabric stores where I buy specialty fabric, such as organdy, still do that. A slip is written up with my name, the fabric I bought, and how much yardage. It is kept on record. I am sure that stores then did the same thing. So the police were able to get a sample of exactly what Lizzie bought. I am wondering if they also took note of HOW MUCH she bought, and when the fabric was produced by the family, actually measured it to make sure it was ALL there.

I think at the time the police secured the sample of fabric, it would have been impossible for Emma or even Bridget to go to the same store and get the exact same fabric in the same amount without arousing suspicion. They might have been able to go to another store and get the same fabric IF they knew exactly what Lizzie had purchased. Although, again, any purchase like that would have been reported to the police. I would go so far as to say that if ANYONE bought that particular fabric after the murders, they might have been looked at with suspicion.

I think Emma had to produce the exact same fabric that Lizzie bought. It might be possible that SOMEHOW the police missed the fabric in their search.

[Allen]

I think at the time the police secured the sample of fabric, it would have been impossible for Emma or even Bridget to go to the same store and get the exact same fabric in the same amount without arousing suspicion. They might have been able to go to another store and get the same fabric IF they knew exactly what Lizzie had purchased. Although, again, any purchase like that would have been reported to the police. I would go so far as to say that if ANYONE bought that particular fabric after the murders, they might have been looked at with suspicion.

I question as to whether what kind of fabric, the pattern of it, and how much there was of it were made so public that any store owner would be privy to the information. If so, why don't we know more about it? I think if it had been we would find more evidence of it. Would all of the stores have had enough information to be on the look out for who bought that particular fabric, and how much, or just the one in New Bedford where the actual purchase was made?

[SallyG]

I question as to whether what kind of fabric, the pattern of it, and how much there was of it were made so public that any store owner would be privy to the information. If so, why don't we know more about it? I think if it had been we would find more evidence of it. Would all of the stores have had enough information to be on the look out for who bought that particular fabric, and how much, or just the one in New Bedford where the actual purchase was made?

I'm really not sure how public the information was, but obviously the police were interested enough in that piece of fabric to trace it to where it was bought and obtain a sample of it. I think it may be possible that they checked out other stores in the area that carried dry goods, and checked any other purchases of that particular fabric. Just like today, I'm sure not all stores had the same fabric. It's very possible that Emma was able to obtain more of the same fabric, but would she have known what the exact fabric was if it was missing from the house? I'm not sure if she was still at home when Lizzie purchased it.

[KT72]

Forgive me if this has already been addressed here; but.........

I find that it over-stretches the bounds of credibility much too far to say that Lizzie burned:

A dress/skirt
Stockings
A hatchet handle
A newspaper

......in a record amount of time and without any of this leaving some kind of trace or residue in the stove. A long, cylindrical object was seen burning in the stove; possibly a hatchet handle; but as far as I know nothing else was discovered - no buttons, no hooks, no bits of charred fabric. After all, it was a wood-burning stove, not an incinerator; how much stuff can one cram in there and how much would be totally consumed by the heat that kind of stove generates, in the given amount of time? Funny that no one mentioned any odd scents in the house - wood and fabric have a very different odor when they burn than food does. Yet no one who came to the house noticed anything of the kind - at least it's not on record; and the scent of burning fabric would surely have been noticed by the police or doctors present.

[Allen]

Lizzie didn't actually burn the dress on the day of the murders. It was burned later in the presence of both Emma and Miss Russell.

[KT72]

Yes; but I've also read suggestions that she may have burned other clothing in the stove between the murders as well.

[Kat]

The hatchet handle could not have been burned Thursday because it was seen in the cellar in the box with the hatchet head. So that cylindrical shape of ash in the stove must have been something else.

It's a good point about stove vs. incinerator.

No one saw Lizzie burning anything Sunday. She was seen with the fabric in her hands and proclaiming she would burn it.

We've discussed the smells before, of what might or might not have been burned Thursday.
Seems no one heard, saw or smelled anything unusual.

[Allen]

It's stated by Knowlton that he intended to show that Lizzie had tried unsuccessfully to buy prussic acid on at least one occasion before trying to buy it from Bence on the day before the murders.

I found this in the witness statements on page 9:

However, at P.S. Brown's a day or two before, a lady requested a sale of poison from clerk Gifford. She was refused. He could give no description of her.

Maybe it's too bad he couldn't give a description of her, would he have also identified Lizzie as the woman if he had? Or would he have indentified a woman, or given the description of a woman, who could not have been Lizzie? However you look at it, it's interesting that two attempts were made at two separate drug stores to purchase poison so close to the day of the murders.