lizzie borden case reopened

[Cheryl]

On WE television from 3:00-4:00 today was a Case Reopened episode featuring the Lizzie Borden case.

Many experts offered their theories. Brown was one. Many of you feel that his theory has no merit. Would you mind sharing why? I was curious because the airing mentioned things I'd never heard of like a note written to police and a diary found, etc. ???

[Tina-Kate]

Near the end of his life, Brown himself admitted his book was fiction.

Reading the book, you find a lot of errors, inconsistencies, and things that are just plain old "far fetched".

Why would Lizzie put herself thru all of that just to cover up for some secret half-brother?

The "confession" note is part of Knowlton's collection of bogus correspondence he received from cranks & the like.

The existence of the diary was never proven.

Etc, etc, etc...

[Cheryl]

Thanks, Tina Kate. I had no idea he admitted that his work was fiction.
Even the mention of his name on this forum seems taboo, so I really appreciate you filling me in!

[Harry]

Cheryl, the book by Brown itself is not taboo. We used to have on this forum a gentleman who turned every discussion, no matter about what, into one on Brown's book. Needless to say it became tiresome and sometimes led to heated exchanges. You will find many such incidents by just looking through the archives. I'll say no more.

Brown's theory relies on Andrew having an illegitimate son. There is absolutely no evidence for this. The author admits that.

The theory also relies upon a conspiracy of multiple high ranking local and state officials to allow Lizzie to be tried, to be found innocent and to let the real murderer go free. Brown makes the assumption that all these people were paid off.

There are numerous other reasons why the theory simply fails to convince me and many others.

[twinsrwe]

Cheryl, have you read Brown's book?

[Cheryl]

No, I haven't. I heard about the William Borden theory before, but was surprised to hear this special mention all sorts of things I hadn't heard before such as a letter to the police, a diary kept, three "people" witnessing a gentleman wandering around outside the Borden home that day, and one report of a horse & buggy outisde the home that morning.

Even if the theory had merit, I would have trouble accepting William going in there and murdering two people without help. The crime scene was just too clean. And like TinaKate mentioned, I cannot imagine Lizzie going through all she did to cover up for him.

[Susan]

Cheryl, do you have any of the source documents downloaded? They're free, they're located in the Lizzie Borden Virtual Museum and Library section; heres a link to the download page:

http://lizzieandrewborden.com/Resources ... uments.htm

Some of what you have heard about can be viewed in the Trial documents. From my understanding, the police received many letters, was it one letter in particular that drew your attention? Was it the letter addressed to Emma that was given to the police?

As far as a diary goes, I've not read or heard anything about one being found? Did the show state who the diary belonged to?

Mark P. Chase was the witness to the carriage out front of the Borden house at about 5 to 10 minutes of eleven the morning of the murders. His testimony is in the Trial 2 document on page 1361:

Q. Now, about 11 o'clock did you see any carriage or person in the immediate vicinity of the Andrew J. Borden house on Second street?
A. I did, sir.

Q. Tell us what it was or who it was?
A. I can't tell you who it was.

Q. Well, sir, where was it?
A. It was standing by a tree right front of Mr. Borden's fence.

Q. What was it?
A. And (sic) open buggy, box buggy. It was a high top seat, high back.

Q. Anybody in it?
A. Yes, sir.

Q. What?
A. A man in a brown hat and black coat. He was back to me.

Q. Do you know who he was?
A. I can't tell.

Q. Did you ever see him before?
A. No, sir.

Q. Do you know what he was doing?
A. He was sitting in the carriage.

Q. Do you know when he went away?
A. No, sir, I couldn't tell.

Q. And as near as you can fix it, what was the time that you saw him there?
A. I should say it was five to ten minutes of eleven.

Q. Did you ever see such a buggy as that around there before?
A. I never did, no, sir.

Page 1362

Q. Did you ever see that man around there before?
A. No, sir, not to notice him.

To give you a taste if you haven't already read through the Trial transcripts. I found the other witness' that were discussed:

In the Trial 2 document, Page 1378, is Delia S. Manley's testimony to seeing a man leaning on the gateway of the Borden house the morning of the murders.

On page 1460 is the testimony of Sarah R. Hart, she was with Delia Manley and witnessed the man standing in the Borden gateway.

And on page 1369 is the testimony of Dr. Benjamin J. Handy who testified to seeing a pale man on the sidewalk outside of the Borden house the morning of the murders. This would go on to become Dr. Handy's wild eyed man in the papers, though he never mentions the man as being wild eyed in any way. There is just scads of information in the source documents, its the best place to start reading before any of the books or the TV shows.

[twinsrwe]

Cheryl, Susan is right, the best place to start is with the source documents. Once you have read them you will be able to better understand and see the errors in Arnold Brown's book, which contain several unheard of things that no other author has mentioned before, the problem is he failed to provide the reader with any evidence whatsoever for his story.

Mr. Brown admitted in an interview that he had no evidence of Andrew Borden being Williams father. You'll find a collection of Arnold Brown’s interviews on MondoLizzie at:

http://lizzieandrewborden.com/MondoLizz ... rden-case/

Mr. Brown's theory is totally based on William being Andrew's illegitimate son and with no evidence to back up his claim, it leaves the reader to believe his story is nothing but fiction. This is one of the problems I have with his book, it is listed as a non-fiction book, when in reality it should have been listed as fiction. There are just so many loose ends and holes in his theory, it makes ones head spin.

After you read the source documents, you may then want to read Arnold Brown's book for yourself. You can purchase a copy at Amazon Books, or check at your local library, which will most likely have a copy. Here are a couple of links which contain information on the book, customer reviews and a list of currently available books by sellers at Amazon:

Product information:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/044021 ... -1&seller=

19 new and used:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/ ... 127&sr=1-1

You have a lot of reading to do.

[twinsrwe]

I read Arnold Brown's book when it was first published; at the time, I didn't put a lot of stock in his theory because he claimed that his book was written from the memoirs of Henry Hawthorne, yet, when you read his book it is written as if from the memoirs of Ellan Eagan, not Henry Hawthorne. One thing that stood out for me was the fact that this book is written with the thoughts and feelings of Ellan Eagan, that is, it is written as if Ellan Eagan was telling the story instead of Arnold Brown. How could Arnold Brown possibly know what Ellan Eagan was thinking or feeling? So, at the time I first read the book, I basically chalked it up as a very questionable theory, and didn't think much about it. I felt it was an OK story, but nothing to split hairs over.

In November of 2006, I decided to re-read and pick-apart the one thing in Brown's book that I feel ties the entire story together, that being the part regarding the stench of a dead horse's urine infected with the disease called Blister Beetle Poisoning. I wanted to see if I may have been mistaken in my initial impression of his book. I found that my initial impression had not changed.

NOTE: For the Forum members who may recall the following write up which I posted in the thread titled, Brown admitting hoax, I did revise this a bit, by adding some things to it, changing the font color from my comments to the passages written by A. Brown and putting his comments in an Italic font. So, you may want to read through it, for hopefully a more complete observation on my part.

Following are the discrepancies I found regarding the stench of a dead horse's urine infected with the fatal disease called Blister Beetle Poisoning... (Please note: I am only going to type up the parts of Brown's text, in Italic using a blue font, that deal with the issue of the stench of a dead horse's urine infected with the fatal disease called Blister Beetle Poisoning; my personal comments and questions will be typed using a black font).



On page 7 of A. Brown's book, he tells us that Ellan Eagan had gone to Sargent's for some yard goods. Heading home she took Second Street. On pages 8-9 of Brown's book, titled Thursday, August 4, 1892; he wrote:

As she neared the Borden house on her way up the hill, she wondered if that silly girl was still washing the windows.

No, the maid was not in sight, but Ellan saw a man in the Borden yard, just standing there. There was something about this man that was wrong! He was about halfway between the gate and the back stoop, and he was facing her. He turned as if to go back. His clothes were dirty and course, but what had caught her eye was that he was wearing an overcoat - and on one of the hottest days of the year! He stopped and turned his face toward her. His eyes looked into hers.

She sucked in her breath, gasping. Feeling faint, she shivered and almost cried out in terror. Speak of the Devil and he will appear roared in her ears. I am seeing the Devil!

When he took a step toward her, she ran. She had to get away, and somehow she did, feeling the fire from his eyes burning right through her. Even though she was confused and filled with terror, she knew something else was wrong, too. As she sped away her senses finally told her what it was. It was his odor - one that she had never smelled before. It was not sour, not sweet, not a manure smell, not sweat... not anything she could even imagine! Intent on getting help, she ducked into the first yard she came to, gasping and sobbing. Then she was sick.

When her wits returned, Ellan was on the ground under a shade-giving elm tree on cool, comforting grass. She wasn't sure whether she had fainted, but she realized she must have done so. Even if she had fainted, she had no idea how long she had been there.

Suddenly she remembered what had frightened her and looked around. There was nothing but the usual traffic.


This man, whom Arnold Brown claims was Bill Borden, had come face to face with an eye witness who saw him standing in the Borden's yard. Why in the world would this man, who had, supposedly, just killed two people, allow an eye witness to go free? Why didn't he kill her, too? Granted someone would have, most likely, seen him do the deed, if he attempted to do her in there, but, he could have gotten to her and killed her at a later time, before she had a chance to go to the police. I just cannot see a killer letting an eye witness go without tracking her down and doing away with her. This just does not make sense to me. Furthermore, why was Ellan Eagan the only person to see this man standing in the Borden's yard on the very busy Second Street?


On pages 4-5 of A. Brown's book, titled Summer of 1911, he wrote:

Ellan's whole family had come to the parade together. Even Little Mary's beau - Henry Hawthorne - was there. It was all so grand until she saw the horsecars, two of them, like those that had disappeared from the streets twenty years earlier when almost overnight, the electric streetcars replaced them. The instant she saw the first horsecar, she shivered with the strangest chill. Then, as they passed where she was standing, suddenly Ellan gave a small cry of alarm, and - for only the second time in her life that she could remember - she fainted.

When she regained consciousness, she tried to convince her family that nothing was wrong. In, fact, nothing was, at least nothing she could explain. It had been years since she thought about her "devil," not that she didn't talk about the day of the Borden murders. Why, hardly a week went by without someone talking about it.

Ellan had been surprised at her reactions when the horses passed by in the parade. It was the odor that had stunned her, and when the first horsecar passed, she had had an imaginary glimpse of the man in the long coat, an imagined stare into his burning eyes, and a lingering, chilling whiff of that forgotten smell - whatever it was - that she had so successfully banished from her senses all those many years. She knew what horses smelled like, and this order was nothing related to any of the hundreds of horses with which she had had contact. She was honestly frightened.


Arnold Brown claims, and we are to believe, that the odor Ellan smelled at this parade in 1911, is the same odor she smelled on August the 4th, 1892, when she, supposedly, came face to face with a man, whom Arnold Brown claims was Bill Borden, standing in the Borden's yard. At the time of this parade, Bill Borden was no where around; he had been dead for 10 years! (Bill Borden died April 17th, 1901; see page 295 of Brown's book for the date of his death).


On pages 288-291, of A. Brown's book, Ellan Eagan questions Henry Hawthorne about Bill Borden's odor; Brown wrote:

After preparing him something to eat and while her resolve was at its highest, Ellan placed herself across from Henry, stared directly into his eyes, and without any introduction asked hum, "Did Bill Borden ever smell different from anything normal?"

"What the heck!" Henry was startled and amused.

"Just tell me. Did Bill Borden ever stink real bad?" she persisted, almost begging.

"He was a farmer. He killed and gutted chickens and ducks, he slaughtered many a horse, he butchered pigs and cows, and anytime anyone shot a deer he was the one they called upon to butcher it. He mucked his barn twice a day. Of course he stunk. I never knew a farmer who didn't. Why?"

"No," she said sternly. "Was there ever a time when he smelled of stink you can't describe?"

"No," he told her honestly. "But I remember the time he made me stink to high heaven, if that answers your question. I'll never forget that awful stench, and I swore I would never smell like that again."

"Well. I hope you never do, too, whatever it was. Tell me about it." They both seemed to relax as Henry returned to his boyhood days with the newfound confidence that he could handle all the frightening memories that had lingered so long in his life.

Bill was not above playing pranks on Henry. One memorable practical joke occurred when he told Henry how to clean himself after the last hard day of cleaning the casks. When Henry had finished the cleaning to Bill's satisfaction, Bill handed him a jar of something that looked like axle grease and a cake of lye soap and told him to be sure and rub this secret grease on all of the spots of his body where the cider residue and the cleaner had come in contact. Henry did exactly as he was told and, when he got into the waterhole that was a summertime bath tub, every part of his skin he had rubbed with Bill's grease began to burn. When the burning stopped, he noticed the foulest odor he had ever smelled. He sniffed the water, the soap, the rag; they all smelled awful. He dried and dressed and ran from the waterhole, but the stench seemed to follow him.

Henry had to sleep in the barn that night and for the next three nights, too, which was no hardship to a young farm boy. It seemed that the livestock grew restless in his presence through, as if he offended them. He knew he offended any human who came within yards of him. The smell lasted two weeks.

Henry added that during his war service he had kidded a veterinarian about the perpetual odor of his boots, and the vet told him that horse urine had high concentrates of many waste product chemicals in it and that sniffing it was one of the quickest ways to determine imbalances that could point directly to possible health problems in the animal. The vet then delivered an unasked-for lecture on the possible variations in odor that could occur and the ramifications of each.

Henry didn't really listen until the doctor mentioned a fatal disease called Blister Beetle Poisoning and the related stench always found in the dead horse's bladder. He had laughed when the vet mentioned that the blister beetle is also known as "Spanish Fly," but stopped laughing when the doctor added that getting any of the dead horse's urine on your own skin was not recommended unless you wanted to be ostracized from the human race until it wore off. When Henry asked if it could be washed off with soap and water, he was told that water would make it worse.

"Your Bill Borden acted as a vet or a renderer, didn't he? He removed dead horses, you told me," Ellan stated.

"Oh, I figured it out that Bill had added something to that jar of salve he gave me to use long before the vet explained what it might have been."

According to Arnold Brown's book, Henry Hawthorne did not verify that Bill Borden ever smelled like a stink you can't describe. Brown is insinuating that the stench of a stink you can't describe, is the same as the stench found in a dead horse's urine that had become infected with the fatal disease called Blister Beetle Poisoning. If Bill Borden never smelled of a stink you can't describe, then how could the man that Ellan Eagan claimed she saw in the Borden's yard the day of the murders, possibly be Bill Borden?


Then, on page 313, of A. Brown's book, he wrote:

William may have entered the Borden house by the front door opened by Uncle John (with Lizzie's knowledge) at some time before midnight on August 3, talked with Lizzie and Uncle John, and then slept in the same room as Uncle John or in Emma's empty bedroom. An alternative is that he spent the night in the hayloft of the Borden barn and was admitted to the cellar that morning by Lizzie after Uncle John and her father had left the house. At that time Bridget was outside at the front of the house, and Lizzie, knowing that a note had been delivered to her stepmother, thought Abby had changed her clothes and left the house with William Bassett on some real or imagined errand of mercy.

I have to question why Bill's odor was not detected by someone in the household that fateful day; Andrew, Abby, Bridget, Dr. Bowen, Mrs. Churchill, the policemen... ; someone would surely have detected the stench. If Bill Borden's odor was so repulsive that he would have been ostracized from the human race, livestock grew restless, and the stench followed him where ever he went for a period of two weeks, then why wasn't his odor detected? According to Brown everyone in that household, with maybe the exception of Bridget, knew who Bill Borden was. If they knew who he was, they would also know that he reeked to high heaven. If Ellen Eagan could smell Bill's odor, while they were both outside, he in the Borden's yard, between the gate and the back stoop and she on the sidewalk, which means that she was standing several feet away from him, you know that it was extremely strong.

If Bill slept in the same room as Uncle John his odor would have lingered in the sheets that would have touched his body. The stench would have also clung to Uncle John's clothing, hair, and skin. I would also think that William's stench would, most likely, have fumigated the entire upstairs and possibly traveled down the staircase to the front entry way. Surely, Abby would have picked up on this stench when going upstairs to tidy up the room where Uncle John had slept on the night of August 3rd. Wouldn't Andrew have detected the odor while having breakfast with Uncle John the morning of August 4th?

If Bill slept in Emma's room, the stench would have lingered in the sheets that would have touched his body, and would, mostly likely, have fumigated the entire upstairs and possibly traveled down the staircase to the front entry way. Again, Abby would have picked up on this stench when going upstairs to tidy up the room where Uncle John slept.

If Bill spent the night in the hayloft, Bridget would have detected his stench. Didn't Bridget go out to the barn to get the water the wash the windows? Even if Bridget did not detect the odor in the barn, you cannot tell me that his odor would not have been detected by someone after he spent an hour to an hour and a half in the house waiting for Andrew.

If this man smelled that bad, he could not possibly have hidden in the Borden house for any length of time without being detected. The stench would have lingered in the house for hours after he had left. I really cannot see how any of the people who were in the house that day could possibly have missed it.

According to Arnold Brown, the stench Ellan Eagan claimed she smelled on the man she saw in the Borden's yard the day of the murders and again at the parade in 1911 was the stench found in a dead horse's urine, which had become infected with the Blister Beetle Poisoning disease, not the smell of urine from a live horse. If this is true, where was the dead horse with it's bladder exposed, so that it gave off the stench of urine that Ellan Eagan was so stunned by that she fainted at the parade which took place in the summer of 1911? If there was no dead horse, then what or whom was the odor coming from? Obviously, it was not coming from Bill Borden, since he had been dead for the past 10 years at the time of this parade. So, who had the dead horse's urine that had become infected with the Blister Beetle Poisoning disease on them at the parade?

The dead horse's urine part of Brown's book just does not add up, does it?

The stench of a dead horse's urine, along with a couple of other discrepancies that I found, definitely axed Arnold Brown's theory for me.

[Cheryl]

Susan, thank you for the suggestion -- I will be downloading these documents for sure! I cannot remember who the letter was addressed to, but it was supposedly from William admitting to the crime. The diary, from what I remember from the program, belonged to a relative (?) of William and supposedly substantiated his guilt and feelings of hatred for Andrew. It was supposed to have come into light sometime after his death.

And thank you, Twinsrwe for taking the time to highlight some of the book's exerpts and your thoughts on these!! Wow- the whole dead horse's urine analysis was interesting and I agree with and appreciate your findings.

[twinsrwe]

... I cannot remember who the letter was addressed to, but it was supposedly from William admitting to the crime.

There were several letters sent to Hosea Knowlton, the prosecuting attorney, from all over the world. The letter you are referring to here, was from a man in Albany, NY, who claimed to be Andrew's illegitimate son. The name of this man was not given in the film, that is if a name was even indicated on the letter. It was Arnold Brown's belief that this illegitimate son was William Borden; yet, he admitted he had no evidence to back up his claim of William Borden being Andrew's illegitimate son.

There is a segment, regarding this letter, in Arnold Brown’s interviews on the MondoLizzie link, which I provided you with in my first post above. This film also contains Arnold Brown's confession that he had no evidence to back up his claim of William Borden being Andrew's illegitimate son.

... And thank you, Twinsrwe for taking the time to highlight some of the book's exerpts and your thoughts on these!! Wow- the whole dead horse's urine analysis was interesting and I agree with and appreciate your findings.

You're welcome, Cheryl. I hope this helps you to understand how Arnold Brown failed to tie up the loose ends and show proof for his theory.

[Nadzieja]

Thank you for all that typing. That was a very interesting segment. I haven't read Brown's book yet even though I have it. I'm glad to know that it was a hoax so when I do read it, I'll keep in in mind. I'm almost done with 40 Whacks, then I was going to read Did Lizzie Axe For It.

[Susan]

You're welcome, Cheryl. Its so great to have all these documents at your fingertips, you can pretty much crossreference anything you read or hear by using the search feature that each document contains.

Thanks, Judy. Yes, thats the only letter I know of which pertains to an illegitimate son who confessed to the killings.

Hmmm, maybe the diary that was referred to in that show was the one that allegedly belonged to Henry Hawthorne that Brown supposedly got his information from?

[twinsrwe]

Thank you for all that typing. That was a very interesting segment. I haven't read Brown's book yet even though I have it. I'm glad to know that it was a hoax so when I do read it, I'll keep in in mind. I'm almost done with 40 Whacks, then I was going to read Did Lizzie Axe For It.

You're welcome, Lorraine. I am glad you enjoyed it. I think you will find Brown's book interesting to read. I would be interested to hear what you have to say about Arnold Brown's book, once you have had a chance to read it; it is my hope that you form your own opinion on his book.

[twinsrwe]

Thanks, Judy. Yes, thats the only letter I know of which pertains to an illegitimate son who confessed to the killings.

You're welcome, Susan.

Hmmm, maybe the diary that was referred to in that show was the one that allegedly belonged to Henry Hawthorne that Brown supposedly got his information from?

According to the film I mentioned above, Ed McBain did say that Brown basis his theory on an spectacular coincidence he discovered in the unpublished diaries of Henry Hawthorne.

This is what Brown wrote on page xiv of his book, about Henry Hawthorne's memoirs:

"When the materials arrived, my first reading invoked smiles. What I had was a collection of disconnected ramblings with events choreographed backwards, with simple timing wrong, and with major characters totally ignored or, at best, moved from their traditional locations."

Makes one wonder how Brown managed to unravel the story and come up with his theory, doesn't it?

[Bobbypoz]

Ok the last time I ever say anything like this...it was so wonderful to be able to read this topic very calmly and rationally without any interuptions telling me how stupid I am for not totally agreeing with Brown and his theory or thinking that some other theory has some merit.

Thanks everyone for the information and for being YOU!

~B

[Nadzieja]

Hi Bobbypoz, First I want to say you ARE NOT stupid. Everyone is entitled to their thoughts & opinions. And my goodness!!! who knows what could happen if you read something you never thought of and start to think in a different way. I know I'm being a wise mouth. I love the different thoughts, opinions & ideas, that's what makes this forum interesting. As for the Brown book, I'll get to it, it's just that because I haven't been into this subject as much as most people on here, I'm just a little concerned about knowing what is fact & what is fiction. That's why I started with the inqest testimony & witness statements. Later I'll dive into the trial. Now I have to ask because I'm not sure---who is Henry Hawthorne? I'm wracking my brain but can't seem to figure out where he fits into the picture.

[Angel]

it was so wonderful to be able to read this topic very calmly and rationally without any interuptions telling me how stupid I am for not totally agreeing with Brown and his theory or thinking that some other theory has some merit. ~B

I was just going to write the same thing and then I saw this.

Isn't it nice?

[twinsrwe]

Ok the last time I ever say anything like this...it was so wonderful to be able to read this topic very calmly and rationally without any interuptions telling me how stupid I am for not totally agreeing with Brown and his theory or thinking that some other theory has some merit. ...

Hi Bobby. I also want to say that you are NOT stupid. You are entitled to your opinions just like everyone else on this forum. I don't know, and don't want to know, who told you that you were stupid, but whoever it was, had no right to say that to you.

... Thanks everyone for the information and for being YOU! ...

You are quite welcome, Bobby.

[twinsrwe]

... Now I have to ask because I'm not sure---who is Henry Hawthorne? I'm wracking my brain but can't seem to figure out where he fits into the picture.

According to Arnold Brown, Henry Hawthorne was Ellan Eagan's son-in-law. The memoirs that Brown received from Lewis (Pete) Peterson, Henry's son-in-law, were supposedly written by Henry when he was eighty-nine years old and near death; although, Henry wrote the memoirs, it was actually Ellan Eagan who discovered the identity of Andrew and Abby's killer. (see Brown's book pages xiv-xv).

According to Arnold Brown, Henry's father had served as a tenant farmer to William Borden. Henry's first memory of Bill was when he was 3 years old; Bill Borden died in 1901, when Henry wasn't yet a teenager. (See pages 281-283 of Brown's book). So, Henry's memoirs were those of a pre-teenaged boy.

I have always wondered how Brown could claim theses memoirs were Henry's when the way in which he wrote his book was written as if the memoirs came from Ellan Eagan. If these memoirs were written by Henry Hawthorne, how could he have possibly known what Ellan Eagan was thinking and feeling as she walked along Second Street???

Another thing I have always wondered is why Henry Hawthorne waited until he was eighty-nine years old and near death before writing down any of his memoirs? Why didn't Henry want to make a name for himself by writing a book that would solve the Borden murder mystery? For that matter why didn't Lewis (Pete) Peterson want to make a name for himself by writing a book that would solve the Borden murder mystery? Why were these memoirs given to an unknown author??? Where are these memoirs now???

[snokkums]

Even thou I don't to much merit to Brown's theory, I have always subcribed to the attitude, that, just because there is no documentation of a situation, doesn't mean it didn't happen. While there is no proof of an illegamen(spelling,sorry), that doesn't mean that he didn't exist. You have to keep in mind, back then, they didn't keep records like we do to day. Keeping records like we do to day is a releatively new thing. Curisousy of Franklin Roosevelt. Most of the time back then everything was put in the family bible, such births, baptisms, marriages and deaths.

I am just saying anything could have been, and we really don't know because we don't have that kind of documentation.