Lizzie Loved Dogs: Why No Dog at 92 Second Street?

joe1956 · Post by **joe1956** » Fri Apr 09, 2010 8:07 am

I always wondered why Lizzie never owned a dog at 92 Second Street. I know she had her pigeons, but why did she never own a dog? Did Andrew simply forbid her from having a pet? Did Abby consider pets to be dirty and destructive to her home? Did Lizzie ask Andrew often? Was Lizzie close to any pets in her neighborhood? Her love of animals must have been a lifelong passion that was only able to bloom after Andrew was gone. Just some questions, and food for thought.

Tina-Kate · Post by **Tina-Kate** » Fri Apr 09, 2010 10:10 am

It's possible Andrew considered homes were for people & not animals. Farmers were more prevalent back then & the attitude was that one kept animals to work for you. Dogs had dog houses. Cats lived in the barn. Maybe he permitted a cat on the premise it would catch mice but saw no use for a dog?

mbhenty · Post by **mbhenty** » Fri Apr 09, 2010 2:41 pm

In the 1800s it was hard enough earning a living and feeding the kids and the dog.

Thus, only the wealthy had dogs. And like today, the more wealth you have the smaller the dog.

One can only guess to why the Second Street Borden residence did not have a dog. If they did, I can only say....poor dog.

But in Victorian Times dogs could be fashionable, a warped display or statement of wealth. Like a fur coat.

But to someone who loved animals having a pet was natural; and for a Post Victorian Lady that would mean small dogs; and if you lived in New England, a Boston Terrier was an excellent choice.

Not to mention the fact that dogs were probably the best friend Lizzie had.....and she probably thrived on that.

Below is an excellent piece on VICTORIAN LADIES AND THEIR PETS.

Check it out:

http://www.victoriana.com/pets/dogs.htm

Angel · Post by **Angel** » Fri Apr 09, 2010 3:49 pm

I guess, then, by those standards, I am as poor as a churchmouse and as uncouth as they come, because my "lapdog" is 100 lbs, half wolf, completely covered in long white fur and can easily steal things from the top of a standard sized refrigerator by standing on his hind legs. Get the smelling salts!

kssunflower · Post by **kssunflower** » Fri Apr 09, 2010 4:57 pm

What, no Chihuahuas?

I know they were a recognized breed by the 1890's. With my two Italian Mastiffs, I'd certainly be a pauper.

snokkums · Post by **snokkums** » Fri Apr 09, 2010 7:48 pm

Knowing Andy, he probably wouldn't have paid to feed the dog, knowing what a tight wad he was.

SteveS. · Post by **SteveS.** » Mon Apr 12, 2010 7:16 pm

I wouyld think that unless a dog brought in income or you could eat it.....Andrew Borden wasn't about to waste money on feeding it.

nbcatlover · Post by **nbcatlover** » Wed Apr 14, 2010 8:07 pm

If you believe the story of Abby's cat, would a household with a cat in the house necessarily want a dog too. If the story is to be believed, Lizzie certainly didn't want the cat in the house.

augusta · Post by **augusta** » Sat Apr 17, 2010 12:04 pm

Thanks for the link, mb.

That was very interesting. I don't think that I've ever heard of a 'toy Greyhound'? I gotta get out more ...

What a post, Angel!

Wow!

I agree with Tina-Kate in that a cat was okay to the Bordens because it could catch mice.

Could it be that Lizzie resented cats because one was allowed but dogs, that she probably yearned for, were not?

Probably Andrew didn't want a dog because of the expense - the food it would eat, and like y'all said, it would not serve a purpose to him.

I don't think that story about Lizzie chopping the head off a cat in the basement was true. It came from a very good source (Little Abby Borden) but she was quite old when she said it and I get the idea that she got her facts confused and possibly thought it happened. It just doesn't sound realistic.