Andrew Borden's Premonition

[camgarsky4]

I believe this is a new topic for this group.
Was Andrew just being a typical father and wanting to know where his kids would be or something specific to the family dynamics that summer?

Lizzie Borden: Past & Present. Leonard Rebello Page 82.
Andrew Borden's Premonition
"Did Andrew J. Borden, after living almost to the period allotted to man, have a presentiment that he would suddenly be taken ill or meet death? The remark he made to his daughter Emma just before she left home to go to Fairhaven indicates that he had something on his mind, for he was never known to make a statement like it.

Notwithstanding the numerous times they have been away from the home, he said, "Emma, if I should want you immediately while you are away, where shall I find you?" His inquiry had a pronounced effect on his daughter, and she inquired why he asked the question. He remarked, "Nothing in particular, only I feel that I would like to know in case anything should happen." Emma gave him the required information, and he apparently felt much better because of it. This is a peculiar fact in view of the terrible tragedy."
Fall River Daily Herald, August 10, 1892 Page 1.

[Lorcan]

I think it could be a premonition or simply someone trusted (a doctor, a professional colleague he respected) telling a story or making a comment that really brought mortality and getting affairs in order top of mind for Andrew. It could also be how he was feeling - an unexpected pain he never felt before - a shortness of breath that a certain hill never caused before, etc.

It could be Abby felt worried that in the event of his death, as things stood, his daughters would kick her to the curb at the first opportunity, and she wanted to be assured, legally, that there would be no contesting of asset division in court that would be a long process leaving her, at least temporarily, in a bad position.

I don't know how much of this is Victoria Lincoln or similar, but for the sake of argument let's assume Andrew was putting his affairs in order. I don't have the details on these, but perhaps someone does. Please answer if there is plausible evidence for each of these:

1. Andrew was working on a will, at least making an inventory for it.

2. Andrew decided to put property in Abby's name to assure her financial well being after his death.

3. Andrew was altering his business arrangement with Uncle John - perhaps asking him to oversee the Swansea Farms as an advocate for Abby if that was her inheritance. Not necessarily that John would run it day to day, but check in on it to make sure the investment was protected and being run properly a few times a year.

Then there is the area I heard about but have not been able to confirm anywhere in official testimony so far:

1. When was the argument that saw both daughters leave and Emma come back and Lizzie stay for a while at a boarding house?

2. How close was that to the murders?

3. Did Emma "get out of Dodge" so to speak the 2 weeks before the murders - did she get so worried Lizzie might do something, she didn't want to be around, or was the tension so high in the house it was simply too much for Emma to deal with?

[camgarsky4]

There is zero evidence or even contemporary suggestion that the family had an argument and the daughters left because of that. Same applies to the boarding house for Lizzie. I believe those comments are in the Lizzie Borden wikipedia writeup and elsewhere. To my knowledge, they are modern day fabrications or guesses. That is not to say a family argument didn't drive all those behaviors, just nothing to inform us of that.

Only indication that Andrew had a will on his mind are his comments to Morse (testimony) and Cook (witness statement which Cook partially denied at the PH). Reportedly found in Abby's clothing was a partial list of family assets.

Nothing about Andrew and Morse relationship concerning Swansea besides the letter Andrew wrote Morse that was read into evidence.

[Lorcan]

ok, let's treat Camgarsky's clarifications as an evidence sieve and see what we're left with:

1. Andrew wrote a letter to Uncle John Morse asking him to recommend a man to run his farm, but told Morse he wanted to speak to him in person before sending a man for him to interview. Does that mean Andrew wanted to have a back and forth conversation to make his requirements clear that would be inefficient or undesirable in a letter?

2. Andrew did not have a written will at the time of his death.

3. Andrew's lawyer almost certainly suggested a will to a man of Andrew's wealth, especially considering the number and variety of his assets (banks, mills, real estate, stock) and Andrew chose not to make one. That indicates to me he was ok with letting ordinary law play out for the distribution of assets. That seems very odd to me for a man who seemed like he had very specific and definite opinions about money matters.

I don't know what else we have that is documented or can be reasonably inferred. Back to the original question of a premonition. I think Andrew had to be aware of his age and his responsibilities to the 3 women for whom he was the only source of funds.

Given that Abby sent Bridget outside and willingly stayed alone in the house with Lizzie and that Andrew took a nap downstairs rather than his locked bedroom, I think maybe the tension was not as high as is often portrayed. I don't think either of the parents actually suspected they were in imminent danger from Lizzie.

[Inspector]

Cam, do you trust the FRDH article/comments to be true, and if so, on what basis? Emma doesn’t seem the type to give interviews, but perhaps someone close leaked the information.

To me it sounds like a normal thing for most parents, but hard to say with Andrew.

[camgarsky4]

The Daily Herald seems to be quoting Emma second hand, but they were not as 'renowned' as the Globe at sensational writings concerning the case. That said, I posted the info more as a curiosity, since it might or might not have any correlation to the crimes.

If I had to 'speculate' on a interesting reason for his request, might he have thought making family announcements could be forthcoming and wanted Emma in the loop if and when that occurred? Just stirring it up....I haven't a clue.

I agree with Lorcan that the elder Borden's had no clue they were in perilous danger.

Back to the known 'evidence' about Andrew and a will. I do find Charles C. Cook's witness interview and subsequent PH back tracking fascinating and a bit suspicious. To me, he is clearly trying to position himself to garner an expanded role with the Borden family and estate and did not want to upset the sisters. To that end, he was wildly successful, becoming Lizzie's business manager for the remainder of her life. For me, that gives some merit to what Medley wrote in his interview notes about Cook's comments, which make it seem that Andrew had a WILL at least partially on his mind.

[Lorcan]

Hmm, what if Andrew and Abby actually did want to share the information with the daughters and he wanted Emma at the dining room table for that discussion? Maybe that was to be the end of the tension - what's done is done - at least there is no more mystery or spiraling anxiety about their financial futures. Imagine Andrew calling Emma back, perhaps with the lawyer at the table as well.

The lawyer might open things up with a speech like this:

"All of your financial futures have been secured. Your parents asked me to be here to answer any and all of your legal concerns, so by the time we leave this table, everything is out in the open and you can all rest assured that your financial futures are completely secure. The entirety of Andrew's holdings are evenly split, with Abby keeping the house coming out of her portion. This was decided to be best since it is close to her half-sister and Emma and Lizzie have expressed strong interest in living elsewhere. The split is roughly 35% to Emma, 35% to Lizzie and 30% plus this house to Abby. Do you have any questions or concerns?"

[camgarsky4]

As fair as that outcome sounds to me.....I bet the discussion would have got really interesting once the lawyer was done with his speech.

[TeenaBee]

Yes, I also wonder at the Herald's source. It is maddening how often reporters did not attribute what they wrote up for publication.

If it was legitimately something Andrew said to Emma, I think Lorcan's supposition reasonable that Andrew could have been experiencing symptoms of old age, feeling a little wobbly in his health. That could also be why he was starting to hint at the idea of making a will.

But also, from my Lizzie-maybe-didn't-do-it perspective in which I think police failed to do their due diligence in investigating other potential enemies of Andrew, it seems possible that stubborn Andrew could have been experiencing some kind of conflict with a powerful someone he sat on some board with, someone he was standing in the way of getting something they wanted, someone he worried could escalate the conflict. Pure speculation :) But the man did soon end up murdered, so perhaps the Herald reporter was onto something when he wrote about a "premonition"...

[Inspector]

Off subject a bit, but Knowlton offered a possible reason why Lizzie killed her dad, and its has been touched on by others. Also, the thought that she did is so upsetting that its is hard to believe, but it’s because most human beings have a conscious that won’t allow certain lines of morality to be crossed.
The love of a parent, a child, a friend, or even a pet doesn’t allow the thought of purposefully hurting them,
Knowlton offered the theory that Lizzie realized after killing Abby, that there was only one way to avoid detection.
This theory which Knowlton says relived his mind somewhat, is a very week excuse for such an evil act, though possibly the only way to get a glimpse of what she was thinking,

[Lorcan]

I just finished Jim Jordan's two-volume audiobook that covers most of the transcripts while on a road trip this long weekend, but it has gaps and summaries. I didn't find anything truly useful except I need to verify something that was said about the dresses that morning. If it's relevant, I'll post.

Back to the actual thread topic, here's where I end up so far:

1. Based on their behavior, I don't think Andrew and Abby were truly suspicious of or afraid of Lizzie. They both willingly left themselves alone and potentially vulnerable. No food precautions were taken, so if poisoning was truly suspected, no existing food was thrown away. Neither was the milk, since the wrong days (the most recent) were there to be tested.

2. Do I think Andrew and Abby were starting to think about what would happen when Andrew passed away? Yes. I don't have enough info yet to know if Andrew was truly looking for a different house (the one that became the Quequechan Club). Then there is the potential donation of land in Swansea to the adjacent Old Ladies home - not sure if that is real, either. But, in general, I think Andrew would be wise to have been thinking about arranging his legacy at his age and Abby would certainly be wise to make sure Andrew formally protected her so she didn't have to go to court with Lizzie and Emma after he died.

As far as the motive for killing Andrew, if it was Lizzie who did it and Andrew's murder wasn't pre-planned, I think Lizzie thought she could get Bridget out of the house and stage a break-in before she also left, so that John or Andrew would return to a crime scene and both women would have plausible alibis. So the motive was desperation - having a dream team of lawyers and remaining silent is one thing - the conversation with Andrew in the minutes after he found Abby slaughtered with Lizzie being the only one known to be in the house and trying to convince Andrew she was completely innocent and heard nothing would be a very, very, very risky conversation for Lizzie.

If it was pre-planned, Lizzie was taking a huge risk not knowing who would be around (Bridget and John) and not knowing that Andrew would put himself in such a vulnerable position sleeping on the sofa rather than locked in his bedroom. Gut feeling right now is Lizzie didn't expect Andrew to return so early and she felt trapped and improvised.

[Inspector]

From all accounts it seems Andrew figured out who broke into their bedroom and stole the items. If it was on Lizzie’s mind then that helps your desperation theory . However, it also points to a previous plan that went wrong, yet Lizzie didn’t leave Bridget after Andrew was killed.
All of this , and trying to get Bridget out, has always made me believe that Lizzie cared for Bridget, at least enough to keep her from the gallows.
When Lizzie was suspected and said I am ready to go, was long after she decided to take her chances, stay at the house, and protect Bridget.
Just my thoughts—-If Lizzie was guilty.

[Lorcan]

I agree that Lizzie saved Bridget's life. All Lizzie would have to say is this (below) and Bridget would likely hang and Lizzie would have been free.

1. The last I saw of Abby was her dusting in the dining room just before I went into the basement to use the toilet. I was also feeling sick to my stomach and while I was down there I heard Bridget's familiar footsteps on the floor above. I thought she came back into the house to get a drink or do some cleaning in the sitting room or dining room. I heard her walk back outside a couple of minutes later and when I checked on her I asked her how she was feeling and if she still planned on washing the windows. She said yes and that Mrs. Borden received a note and was called away to attend to a sick friend.

2. I left my father on the sofa and went out to the back yard. I looked back at the house before I went into the barn and saw Bridget looking down on me from her window. She saw me enter the barn. When I returned to the house 20 minutes later I found father dead.

[camgarsky4]

Lizzie 'saved' Bridget's life by not lying. Very benevolent of her.

Would have been interesting if she had pointed the finger at someone else, she would have had to testify and explain all her movements that day in front of the jury and with Bridget's attorney able to cross examine her in great detail.

There would have been zero blood or murder weapon evidence against Bridget, plus Bridget didn't have an apparent alibi...so even less for the prosecution to pin the crime on her.

[Lorcan]

This might be the wrong thread - but yes, you described it correctly - if Lizzie had played that card, she would subject herself to cross examination. Has anyone done a thread about if Bridget could actually defend herself successfully - I assume with a public defender?

It would be an interesting thought exercise. Lizzie would have had to have testified entirely differently and I assume if she planned on blaming Bridget, there wouldn't be a barn story, she would have killed Andrew, cleaned up, and went shopping leaving Bridget to walk down into a crime scene, alone in the house.

[camgarsky4]

Bridget would have had extensive support from the Catholic community, especially if it appeared that Lizzie, the protestant, was being overlooked in order to pursue the poor Irish catholic girl and law enforcements case was based primarily on Lizzie's (the protestant) claims.

Even the way it played out, that 'accusation' was leveled at Hilliard and Mayor Coughlin (both Catholics) that they were protecting their own by pursuing Lizzie instead of 'that Irish maid'. Knowlton Papers has a couple of these letters in the early pages of the book. There were also a couple lengthy articles on this topic just after the preliminary hearing.

I think she would have had excellent legal representation (funded by interested parties) if she had gone to trial and the defense would have stirred things up by targeting Lizzie. If the world thought the crowds during Lizzie's trial were passionate, can you imagine how much more rowdy if there had been a Sullivan trial instead. Religious fervor is a crazy and combustible phenomenon.

[Lorcan]

My Irish grandfather was a member of the Ancient Order of the Hibernians and his father and grandfather worked in the coal mines near Scranton. If you ever saw the movie The Molly Maguires with Sean Connery and Richard Harris, you'll get an idea that Camgarsky is right. The Lincoln County War (Billy the Kid) was essentially an Irish vs. English war about 11 years earlier. There was well earned animosity and I bet there would have been quite a fight in Fall River.

[camgarsky4]

I have seen The Molly Maguires movie....it was excellent and emotional. Back in those days I was anti-union, but that movie got me rooting for the coal miners!!

My grandfather was also a coal miner....Arkansas. What a rough job that was. Our grandfathers were tough guys!

[Inspector]

I have to agree that Lizzie saved Bridget by not lying, along with the farm hand, and Morse. (She must’ve known it couldn’t be proven anyway )
Though she pointed at the strange visitor, and nodded at Hiram Harrington, she did show a protective side for those close to her, possibly due to influences from Emma’s care.

Coming to the end of Spencer’s CALB, I get the impression that Lizzie had a remarkable presence about her when she was a young woman. Obvious to me, she was able to exhibit near total control of her appearance, emotions, and understood how it influenced those around her,
Attorneys, judges, spectators, and friends all cried for her at the acquittal, and somehow she strikes me as still in control throughout the ordeal.
At her gathering after the verdict, she commented about wanting to go back to her home, but was persuaded not to just yet,
She thought it strange that her friends didn’t think it a good idea to return there.
She never had fear in that house, and that is hard to understand, as most would want to escape those memories, as well as any danger.
I do wish her innocent, as I believe Knowlton did , but the circumstances seemed insurmountably negative that she could be.
I suppose part of why I still examine the case, is to try and find a glimmer of hope for her, maybe because it’s so hard to accept,
I know the consensus turned against her after the trial, but I wonder if some of her closest friends saw something we never could in pictures or words on paper.

[camgarsky4]

Inspector, with truly all due respect, if she slaughtered her father and his wife in cold blood, there is nothing redeeming about her post-murder behavior.

How did she protect Morse? The farm hand? There would have to be something more than Lizzie just saying they did something suspicious and there wasn't. Frankly, the same goes for Bridget.
When it comes to Morse, more than one person can come up with lies and point fingers and I'm guessing Lizzie knew not to jack around with her uncle. Pointing fingers at someone else without additional collaboration might even have made Lizzie look MORE guilty to the police.

Let's assume that the murders were either spontaneous or the Plan went askew and she had to ad lib when it came to Andrews killing and her actions afterwards. If the original Plan wasn't to blame Bridget, when would it have dawned on her to do so in those brief minutes after Andrew got home and got killed? She didn't have an hour to sit back and think things through. It was all bang bang bang.

[Inspector]

My intent wasn’t to show redeeming qualities in Lizzie especially if she is guilty, rather that she was influenced from childhood through Emma’s care to at least have base concerns for those who weren’t her enemies.
She apparently stared down Eli Bense to the point he blushed and got flustered, yet conjured up defenses for those she felt unthreatened by. She did have emotional attributes as we all do.
Neither John, Bridget, or the farm hand were pointed to by Lizzie, and my protection statement was based on Lizzie saying positive things about those two men, contrary to her words about HH, and the strange visitor.
If Lizzie is guilty and wanted to implicate JVM, her steel nerves could have aided her in a story of witnessing him and Abby in the guest room before he left and no one could contradict it except possibly Bridget, and I doubt she would, because she never went as far as the sitting room or near the guest room.
It would be Lizzie’s word against Johns.
I think if you reread my post, we agree she knew it couldn’t be proven. Of course Lizzie could say John returned a bit sooner, and Lizzie saw him as she was going to the barn, after all, the testimony isn’t exactly clear as to how John arrived, although the time may be a hurdle.

Your question about blaming Bridget is not one I’d think would work for Lizzie, unless Lizzie had decided to leave Bridget there alone.
Once Lizzie decided to stay, it was too late for that.
The plans might have been changed when Bridget couldn’t be coaxed out, but it seems Lizzie never planned to implicate Bridget in either case, rather an intruder, just like the June robbery.

[Inspector]

If I’m reading you correctly Cam, you see Lizzie’s positive post crime words as not protecting John, Bridget, or whoever out of concern, but rather her simply calculating what would make more sense to protect herself. I would have to say we don’t disagree on that.
I do think it would’ve been easier, and less risky for Lizzie to have blamed John, especially in 1892.

I personally think Lizzie—if guilty—- had a seared conscience, and void of letting murder affect her the way it should.
At her private reception after her acquittal, she stated something to the effect that I’m the happiest person in the world.
This wouldn’t be possible for someone who carried a moral conscience.