Was Dr. Bowen intended to be a scapegoat?

Yooper · Post by **Yooper** » Thu Mar 12, 2009 9:42 pm

Suppose Lizzie committed the murders. She was aware of Abby complaining to Dr. Bowen Wednesday morning of something other than ordinary summer complaint, or food poisoning. She was aware of a complaint of poisoning, and whether thought to be deliberate or not made no difference. Abby may have given Lizzie an idea. Abby was on record with Dr. Bowen with her complaint, which he diagnosed as food poisoning. Maybe Lizzie thought she could take advantage of the situation by purchasing poison and fulfilling Abby's prophecy. If she was successful, Dr. Bowen would be left holding the bag because he didn't test Abby for poison. If Abby had suggested bad milk or bread as the source of the poison, these were not tested either. Lizzie may have thought attention would be directed away from her to several possible sources. So, she tried to buy poison from Bence, but she was unsuccessful.

John Morse arrived later that day, so maybe further attempts at poisoning were forestalled in order to spare her uncle. That night, Lizzie presents a more generalized scenario to Alice Russell:

Trial, page 377+:
Q. Well, we won't follow that any further. Is there any other thing that she began to talk about? Proceed in your own way, Miss Russell
A. I can't recall anything just now. Of course she talked about something else, because she was there two hours, but I cannot think about it.

Q. Anything about trouble with tenants, or anything of that sort?
A. She says, "I don't know," she says, "I feel afraid sometimes that father has got an enemy. For," she said, "he has so much trouble with his men that come to see him." And she told me of a man that came to see him. She told me of a man that came to see him, and she heard him say---she didn't see him, but heard her father say, "I don't care to let my property for such business." And she said the man answered sneeringly, "I shouldn't think you would care what you let your property for." And she said, "Father was mad, and ordered him out of the house." She told me of seeing a man run around the house one night when she went home. I have forgotten where she had been. She said, "And you know the barn has been broken into twice." And I said, "Oh well, you know well that that was somebody after pigeons; there is nothing in there for them to go after but pigeons." "Well," she says, "they have broken into the house in broad daylight, with Emma and Maggie and me there." And I said, "I never heard of that before." And she said, "Father forbade our telling it." So I asked her about it, and she said it was in Mrs. Borden's room, what she called her dressing room. She said her things were ransacked, and they took a watch and chain and money and car tickets, and something else that I can't remember. And there was a nail left in the keyhole; she didn't know why that was left; whether they got in with it or what. I asked her if her father did anything about it, and she said he gave it to the police, but they didn't find out anything; and she said father expected that they would catch the thief by the tickets. She remarked, "Just as if anybody would use those tickets."

Q. Yes. Is there anything else that you recall? Anything about burning the house?
A. She said, "I feel as if I wanted to sleep with my eyes half open---with one eye open half the time---for fear they will burn the house down over us."

Q. Anything else in that connection?
A. She said that before this other.

Q. What had she said just before the burning of the house?
A. I think that was the beginning of her telling me about her fears of somebody breaking in, before she told about the breaking into the barn, I think.

Q. Is there anything else that occurs to you in the conversation?
A. I don't think of anything.

Q. Anything about doing anything to any member of the household; not herself, but anyone else; anything to her father; she was afraid that some one would do anything?
A. Oh, she said, "I am afraid somebody will do something; I don't know but what somebody will do something." I think that was the beginning.

Q. Please state that.
A. "I think sometimes---I am afraid sometimes that somebody will do something to him; he is so discourteous to people." And then she said, "Dr. Bowen came over. Mrs. Borden went over, and father didn't like it because she was going; and she told him where she was going, and he says, 'Well, my money shan't pay for it.' She went over to Dr. Bowen's, and Dr. Bowen told her---she told him she was afraid they were poisoned ---and Dr. Bowen laughed, and said, No, there wasn't any poison. And she came back, and Dr. Bowen came over." And she said, "I was so ashamed, the way father treated Dr. Bowen. I was so mortified." And she said after he had gone Mrs. Borden said she thought it was too bad for him to treat Dr. Bowen so, and [he] said he didn't want him coming over there that way.

If substantially true, this discussion between Lizzie and Alice focuses on an outside intruder. It also broadens the scope from poisoning to someone breaking in and doing something unnamed, as well as suggests someone burning the house down. It reinforces Abby's complaint to Dr. Bowen. This exchange took place the evening of the day Abby visited Dr. Bowen, after an unsuccessful attempt to buy poison, and after realizing John Morse was visiting for an unknown time period. Time may have been of the essence, while Abby's complaint was still a recent event. Perhaps the method was less important than the deed itself, especially if Abby had complained about deliberate poisoning.

DJ · Post by DJ » Fri Mar 13, 2009 11:50 am

I think you've pointed out Lizzie's conundrum if she intended to poison Abby: How to do so without killing Bridget, "Bathroom Morse," or even Andrew?
With Lizzie not taking meals with her parents, how could she target Abby's servings? It would have been difficult enough if they dined together, but nigh unto impossible with the existing situation. About the best she could do was poison an entire pot or serving dish.
I don't believe Lizzie was trying to set up Dr. Bowen-- I do think she was trying to cover her tracks that evening with Alice Russell, in case Abby talked it about that she believed Lizzie was trying to poison her.
Yes, time was now completely of the essence-- especially if Lizzie believed, on top of everything else, she would now be gossiped about as attempting to poison Abby.
***********************************************************
Anyway, I don't think Lizzie was conniving enough to be setting up anyone else for the murders, aside from "Father's enemy"-- whoever that was.
The easiest person to have set up would have been Bridget. After Andrew was good and whacked, Lizzie could have smoothed out her Bengalene silk dress, put on her hat, and gone to town. Bridget would have been in a pretty pickle when she came downstairs, and dollars to doughnuts she would have swung.
However, Lizzie evidently harbored no ill will toward Bridget, and especially not toward Dr. Bowen.
If Lizzie were messing around with poison, and being suspicioned for doing so, she was "deep into it," and had to expedite her plans before she was called out and exposed.

Yooper · Post by **Yooper** » Fri Mar 13, 2009 12:47 pm

I didn't mean to imply that Dr. Bowen might be held responsible as the murderer. His actions might have been seen as contributory negligence if poison had been used. In effect, he and his reputation would have been sacrificed, and it isn't much of a leap at that point to sacrifice Bridget, too. The real point is that an outside source would have been sought as the culprit, and probably at Abby's suggestion. Abby's visit to Bowen might have been a golden opportunity, because Abby had been the first to suggest an outside source was trying to kill her, or would be responsible for her death. Lizzie would have been only supporting Abby's suggestion then when she went to Alice with the information. It would tend to focus attention away from Lizzie as the culprit.

Poisoning was a half-baked scheme at best. Non-specificity was the biggest problem and Lizzie couldn't very well pin the crime on Bridget if she was also dead as a result of it. However, it did cross her mind if she tried to buy poison from Bence. The real value to Lizzie would have been Abby's suggestion that an outside source was responsible, and this might have set the ball rolling.

augusta · Post by **augusta** » Sun Mar 15, 2009 11:54 am

If this were today, a doctor would probably get in trouble for mis-diagnosing Abby. But unless they know to test for arsenic specifically today, they won't get that diagnosis. Back then, her symptoms looked like food poisoning to Dr. Bowen, and I think he diagnosed her to the best of his knowledge.

Why would Lizzie keep blabbing about them being poisoned if they were not?

Yooper · Post by **Yooper** » Sun Mar 15, 2009 12:12 pm

If Lizzie had tried unsuccessfully to purchase poison in front of witnesses, it proved she could not purchase it. That tends to focus attention away from Lizzie to an outside source. It lends credibility to the concept of an intruder. So did Lizzie's conversation with Alice Russell, it expanded on the idea of poisoning specifically by citing examples of unidentified people around the Borden residence at times, and suggested someone might burn the house down. I think Lizzie's focus on poison was to support Abby's contention. This made it Abby's idea, not Lizzie's.

augusta · Post by **augusta** » Mon Mar 16, 2009 10:24 am

Ha! Interesting posts and thinking, Yooper.

I was always a believer that Lizzie did use arsenic on something the Bordens ingested (I thought maybe the warmed over fish on Tuesday evening). Fish can go baaaad. You have to be so careful with it today, and we have 'modern conveniences'.

I don't think Lizzie started blabbing about poison until after Abby's visit to Dr. Bowen. It's new thinking to me. It would have made it a lot easier on Lizzie if she really had no part of it, but she might have been thrilled she had something else, more concrete, to add to her list of Borden threats. She did use the boys-breaking-into-the-barn episode.

It coulda went like that.

Maybe once the folks were already sick, she went to Smith's to try to finish them off with prussic acid. I still don't think she could have gotten out of the house with no one seeing her. But the testimonies of Eli Bence and Hart and Kilroy certainly ring true. They saw her face, and recognized her. But then, so do a lot of sellers on eBay ...

She couldn't have given them more arsenic on Thursday morning, because they were getting better, and that would have started it all over again.

Yooper · Post by **Yooper** » Mon Mar 16, 2009 10:38 am

I think Bence was telling the truth, think of what he stood to lose if he was lying, reputation, job, etc. Why would someone make that up? I seriously doubt that three men would decide to play a prank on the authorities in a capital murder case! How well known was the suggestion of poison at the time Bence came forward? The only other possibility I can see is the police put him up to it, but why?

Yooper · Post by **Yooper** » Mon Mar 16, 2009 10:52 am

Assuming Alice's description of the conversation with Lizzie on Wednesday evening is accurate, notice the progression. Lizzie begins with possibilities for poisoning, first the bread, then the milk, and Alice mollifies Lizzie's contention at each point. Then Lizzie progresses to people around the house and breaking into the barn, and Alice minimizes that. Then Lizzie drops the bomb about the robbery which Alice had not previously heard about. She seems to be trying to come up with something which Alice can not counter. The reason suggested is Andrew's discourtesy to people.

Bob Gutowski · Post by **Bob Gutowski** » Tue Mar 17, 2009 5:12 pm

Yes, and how odd. "Discourtesy." She works her way all the way up the hill, and then ends with a fairly lame throw-in.

augusta · Post by **augusta** » Tue Mar 17, 2009 6:44 pm

Here's a tidbit I hadn't known before:

"It has been the custom of the family to receive its supply of milk from the Swansey farm every morning, and the can was left out of doors until the servant opened the house in the morning." (From 'The Lizzie Borden Sourcebook', page 3.)

I always thought they got it from the town milkman, whoever that may have been.

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Wed Apr 01, 2009 3:12 am

Yooper, I do think you are putting some spin on what happened between Abbie and Dr. Bowen in his consultation with her. Going a bit beyond what we know in testimony. You probably should show backup testimony for your claims, would you? Thanks!

Yooper · Post by **Yooper** » Wed Apr 01, 2009 9:03 pm

From the above quotation of Alice Russell:

"She went over to Dr. Bowen's, and Dr. Bowen told her---she told him she was afraid they were poisoned ---and Dr. Bowen laughed, and said, No, there wasn't any poison."

This addresses Lizzie's awareness, and ultimately it makes no difference whether the poisoning was deliberate or not.

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Thu Apr 02, 2009 3:18 am

Well, you do know, in context, there is a bit more to it than that. That Abbie sounds like she means sickness from food:

Inquest
Dr. Bowen
Q. You had not been called that week to the family?
A. No Sir, I had not been called. I went over to see them. The day before, Wednesday morning, about eight o’clock, or before eight, Mrs. Borden came to the door and said she was frightened, said that she was afraid she was poisened. I told her to come in. She sat down, and she said the night before about nine o’clock she and her husband commenced to vomit, and vomitted for two or three hours until twelve, I understood.
Q. What morning was this?
A. Wednesday morning. I asked her what she had eaten for supper, and she told me. She said she had eaten some baker’s white bread, and she had heard of baker’s cream cakes being poisonous, and was afraid there was something poisonous in the bread that made her vomit. She said

116 (23)

she only ate cake and baker’s white bread. At that time she had a sort of an eructation of vomiting, slightly. I was afraid she was going to vomit there, I rather got ready for her. I told her to go home, and told her what to take; and she took it.

--Using Dr. Bowen's testimony who talked to Abbie, seems more useful, as a primary source, then what Alice tells us Lizzie told her about Abbie's visit to the doctor- double hearsay. Besides, Lizzie was supposedly upstairs when Dr. Bowen came over- he thought he saw her go upstairs.
I do know what you mean, and I'm not saying you are wrong- only that you are extending fact into speculation. As long as this is clear to your readers.

This refers to your statement, in part:

The real point is that an outside source would have been sought as the culprit, and probably at Abby's suggestion. Abby's visit to Bowen might have been a golden opportunity, because Abby had been the first to suggest an outside source was trying to kill her, or would be responsible for her death. Lizzie would have been only supporting Abby's suggestion then when she went to Alice with the information. It would tend to focus attention away from Lizzie as the culprit.

Okay Dokey? I hope you don't mind my being clear?

Yooper · Post by **Yooper** » Thu Apr 02, 2009 11:33 am

I must be missing something, I don't see quite how Bowen's statement differs from Lizzie's statement in substance. The phrasing "sickness from food" overly generalizes both statements. "Sickness from poison" seems to directly state the purpose. If Abby's purpose was to complain about food poisoning, she would likely have used the term "summer complaint", not "poisoning" or "food poisoning". Bowen even mentions the concentrated focus of "something poisonous in the bread", not the bread itself, as the complaint. Her complaint was absolutely not "summer complaint" based upon that.

Lizzie's awareness was the point, not particularly what Abby said to Bowen according to Bowen, but what Lizzie was attempting to portray about it. What Lizzie said to Alice better represents this.

I do not mind any attempt to clarify the statements or purpose, that's what a forum is for! Please don't be afraid to argue!

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Fri Apr 03, 2009 4:20 am

Trying to kill her is quoting you. That is where fact becomes conjecture. That's all I'm pointing out.

As for "summer complaint"- I don't think that phrase is used in testimony in source documents? Can you find it? If not, then why would we agree that Abbie would use that phrase as a self-diagnosis anyway?

Yooper · Post by **Yooper** » Fri Apr 03, 2009 8:21 am

The specific phrasing was: "Abby's visit to Bowen might have been a golden opportunity, because Abby had been the first to suggest an outside source was trying to kill her, or would be responsible for her death." This from Lizzie's viewpoint in conjecture.

When Abby was found dead, it was apparent that someone tried (successfully) to kill her. If Abby had gone to Bowen with a complaint of poison, then Abby would have been the first to imply that an outside source was responsible for her death. If bakery bread was the problem, then it was probably random. If milk was the problem and if it came from their farm in Swansea, then it was probably deliberate. Ultimately, it makes no difference for the conjecture, it would have planted the seed of an idea.

"Summer complaint" is offered as an alternative to poisoning if Abby's complaint was along the lines of indigestion. I did not state that summer complaint was used in the source documents anywhere. It was the common term at the time for food poisoning, and was probably used often in the warm weather. I'm sure Abby was aware of the term and its use.

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Sun Apr 05, 2009 1:43 am

I understand your points, and yes you will notice I included that quote of yours originally in the white "quote box,"earlier.

Anyway, how are you sure that "summer complaint" was a common term and that Abbie would have used it?
If you have done a search of American Victorian phrases, please let us know?

It may be, but what is the source of it? I'd like to know how common the phase is?

Yooper · Post by **Yooper** » Sun Apr 05, 2009 8:26 am

"Summer complaint" was used as early as the 1840's, that I'm aware of, to describe a condition of vomiting and diarrhea. "Dysentery" was also used at that time. I can't quote a source directly, I've come across it during genealogical research. I'm not sure how use of the terms differ, if they apply to specific times of the year, for instance.

There are many terms used to describe a temporary condition of vomiting and diarrhea, indigestion, flu, etc., it was and is a fairly common condition. Most people were aware of the existence of it. In the days of less sophisticated refrigeration it would have been all the more common, particularly in the warm summer weather. I can find no reason to believe that Abby would have been unaware of the condition itself, the term or terms used to describe the condition, or that she would have used the term or terms to describe the condition.

Ultimately, the terms which might have been used are unimportant because Abby described poison as the source of her illness and Bowen diagnosed the more common condition, according to Lizzie. Make particular note of the fact that Bowen diagnosed and treated something other than what Abby originally complained of, which she described as poison according to both Bowen and Lizzie.

We are nowadays aware of the source for the temporary illness, spoiled food. We call it food poisoning because it is the condition of the food itself causing the illness. Even if Abby was aware of all that, which is doubtful, she was describing some agent in the food, not the food itself, as the source of her illness.

Is there anything to suggest that Abby would have been unaware of a temporary condition of vomiting and diarrhea, or was unfamiliar with a common term used to describe the common condition, or that she would not have used the term to describe the condition?

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Sun Apr 05, 2009 2:02 pm

Here's the thing- yes, no matter what it is called, it is as described.

My question is along the lines of how do we know to use that specific term? At least now that is my focus, once we've addressed the phrasing of trying to kill her.

It might be from an author, or might be made up here on the Forum, or from a movie, or a real term used back-in-the-day, etc...

Yooper · Post by **Yooper** » Sun Apr 05, 2009 2:12 pm

OK, I see the dilemma. I was suggesting that Abby would have used a phrase or description such as "summer complaint", or "indigestion", or "dyspepsia", or something other than "poisoning" only if she was complaining of that relatively minor condition. She was not, and that was my point. She used the term "poison" specifically, not another term conveying a less serious malady. The point is that she did not use the term, not that she did.

1bigsteve · Post by **1bigsteve** » Sun Apr 05, 2009 5:30 pm

I don't feel he was intentionally targeted from the beginning. I feel the natural flow of events simply wrapped themselves around Dr. Bowen. The poor guy was in the wrong neighborhood with the wrong neighbors at the wrong time.

-1bigsteve (o:

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Wed Apr 08, 2009 2:25 am

1897 Funk & Wagnalls Dictionary

summer complaint: Colloq. U.S.
diarrhea, especially among children, occasioned by heat or indigestion

1bigsteve · Post by **1bigsteve** » Wed Apr 08, 2009 9:10 am

I'm thinking that maybe the Bordens had a major blow-up, threats of some sort were made, probably by Lizzie, and when Andrew and Abby got sick Abby thought they had been poisoned, probably by Lizzie. If there had been peace in the family the illness would have probably been passed off for what it was, a simple summer time illness. Perhaps Emma left to get away from the storm and uncle John came over to smooth things over?

On the other hand maybe Lizzie had spiked the meal with something. Maybe she had tried some home made poison and when that failed she went for the cyanide?

-1bigsteve (o:

Yooper · Post by **Yooper** » Wed Apr 08, 2009 11:19 am

The organism causing food poisoning had been isolated as early as the 1880's, but little was done about it, the field of medical research was occupied with more serious conditions. As a result, food poisoning wasn't dealt with directly until 1939. The term "food poisoning" would probably not have been in common usage in 1892.

Something made Abby think they were being poisoned when she went to Dr. Bowen the day before the murders. It could have been a major family blow-up as Steve suggested. The fight might have taken place before Lizzie and Emma went visiting. It could be that there was a fight, Emma and Lizzie decided to make themselves scarce for a while, and Lizzie returned, which caused concern on Abby's part.

If Andrew insisted on consuming leftovers until they were gone, it would have made the Bordens more susceptible to food poisoning. If the malady was more common in the Borden household, it would have been less of a reason for Abby to seek medical attention, and the same thrift which governed the complete consumption of food would have resisted unwarranted medical expenses. So, Abby believed strongly enough in the notion of poison that she went to Dr. Bowen in opposition to the prevailing household practice of thrift. The phrase "my money shan't pay for it", if used by Andrew according to Alice Russell, sounds entirely in character with respect to a visit by Abby to Dr. Bowen.

It may be of some importance that Andrew resisted medical attention. There is no reason to believe he was any less ill than Abby the previous night, but he neither wanted to go to Bowen nor have Bowen visit him. He apparently did not share Abby's degree of concern, or he did share the concern and did not want to deal with it in that fashion. Andrew didn't see any physician that day, so it wasn't Bowen specifically he resisted. Andrew did not go out of his way Thursday morning to visit anyone seeking relief from either a medical problem or a poisoning attempt, and this was likely the earliest he would have felt well enough to do so. A large family squabble might have made Andrew less resistant to the idea of poisoning and he might have been more compliant with medical attention.

It seems that Abby was the only person concerned with poisoning. Not necessarily that she was specifically targeted, clearly both she and Andrew were ill Tuesday night, but she somehow grasped the gravity of the situation. She acted on it in spite of the prevailing household practices, whether expressed or tacit. The bottom line is, if Abby feared for her life, she was apparently entirely justified in her fear.