Lizzie Borden Society Forum

Again, from the book, "Did Lizzie Borden Axe For It?", read this this theory:

"A woman named Ellan Eagan, who felt sick on the morning of the moring of the murders and vomited in the Kelly yard besside the Borden property, allegedlly saw a man exit the side screen door of the Borden house on the morning of the murders. It is also allleged that she was told to keep quiet about it after Mayor Caughlen Madrshall HIllard and Police Captain Harrington had decided that Lizzie was their suspect."

Has anyone heard this one?

Short question?

How would this (sick) women see the man "exit the side screen door" if she was on the south side of the property, which is where the Kelly property was?

She could have seen the man walk from the direction of that side of the Borden property, but could she have "seen" him exit the side door?

I do believe that if the police found that they had no leads in this direction, only the lady's assertion to what she seen, they would igonore it. After all it does not lend them to a killer, Lizzie does.

This theory is the basis of Arnold Brown's book.

This article may be of interest

http://www.lizzieandrewborden.com/NewRe ... oversy.htm

OH NO, NOW YOU DONE IT AUDREY!

Great link Auds. I am glad that Stef provides us with so many readily available, free, and reliable resources.



Tracy...

A theory can be easily based on *hidden* testimony.
Ellan Eagan's inquest testimony was not ever published nor referred to in any notes that survived, or to which we have access. The newspaper blurb was along the lines of *what little she had to say brought smiles to everybody* and she was resleased as not having anything worthwhile to contribute. So we don't know what she said. The inquest was closed to the public and to reporters.
That's why it's easy to invent something.
She is not in The New York Times, The Boston Globe, The Evening Standard, Fall River Globe (thru the 11th) or the Providence Journal- at least that I could find.

If her testimony did not survive, then any accounts we have may have been from an interview of her after she was released from the inquest as a witness- or from a spokesperson for her, I suppose.


Rochester, Monroe, NY
Union & Advertiser
Aug 11, 1892

...
"There was a witness at to-day's inquest whose name was not given out by the police when the usual bulletin was issued. It was Mrs. EGAN, who was seen to enter the BORDEN yard before the murders, mistaking it for Dr. KELLY'S property adjoining."
~~~~~~~~

Sourcebook, pg. 47
The Fall River Herald, August 12, 1892 (or 11th ?)
...
"Another woman dropped into the case Wednesday afternoon, but she did not stay long. A lad who drives for Wilkinson, ice cream man, said he saw a woman come out of the Borden yard about 10:30 o'clock Thursday. Officers Harrington and Doherty went to work to find this woman, and they succeeded in discovering that Ellen Eagan was passing that way Thursday morning when she was seized with a sudden illness. She went into the first yard she came to, but it was Dr. Kelly's yard, which is next to the Borden house, and the boy was mistaken."

~~~~~~~

Rebello, pg. 128- 129:

"The Boston Daily Advertiser and the Boston Herald published a more detailed account of Mrs. Eagan's story the morning of August 4, 1892."

"There was a witness at today's inquest, whose name was not given out by the police, when the usual bulletin was issued this afternoon. It was Mrs. Egan [Eagan], who was seen to enter the Borden yard before the murders, mistaking it for Dr. Kelly's property adjoining." Boston Daily Advertiser, August 11, 1892: 1.
- - -

[Brackets are in Rebello, as are the dot dot dot at the *end*]:

"The last witness for the day, and the most inconsequential one of all, was the mysterious woman whom the little Polish peddler, Lubinsky, declared he saw coming out of Borden's yard on the morning of the tragedy, and at time, not far from the hour of it.

Officer Harrington was detailed to work up the case, and he brushed aside the mystery and revealed the unknown in [is] a big, good-natured Irish woman named Emen [Ellen] Eagan who lives on Mulberry Street.

Mrs. Eagan was put on the stand and after the first three questions had been asked her, the authorities were satisfied that her evidence had no bearing on the case.

She answered all the queries directed at her with a bluntness, however, which caused a smile to pass around among the officers, the first tinge of levity which has appeared on this terribly serious case so far.

In the first place, she was not sure whether or not it was Borden's yard from which she emerged on the fatal morning, and a little questioning satisfied the district attorney that, instead of from Borden's she had come out from the yard of Dr. Kelly, who lives in the house above the Borden homestead.

Her reason for her appearance there was a most natural one. She had been feeling unwell for a day or two preceding the murder, and on Wednesday last had experimented on herself with a few pills.

On Friday [Thursday] morning she had occasion to go down to make some purchases, and was taking the Second Street route when she began to feel the effects of the pill. She hurried into Dr. Kelly's yard and accosted a servant girl who was washing the windows, and who directed her to a place nearby.

When she came out of the yard the little peddler saw her but she passed down the street, performed her errand and then returned to her home, totally unconscious of the-fact that she was to become quite an important personage in the eyes of clew hunters. After Mrs. Eagan had testified, the inquest was adjourned until 10 o'clock tomorrow morning ..." Boston Herald, August 11, 1892: 2.

mbhenty @ Fri May 05, 2006 1:51 pm wrote: How would this (sick) women see the man "exit the side screen door" if she was on the south side of the property, which is where the Kelly property was?
She could have seen the man walk from the direction of that side of the Borden property, but could she have "seen" him exit the side door?
I do believe that if the police found that they had no leads in this direction, only the lady's assertion to what she seen, they would igonore it. After all it does not lend them to a killer, Lizzie does.

You can read Arnold Brown's book. Ellan saw this "devil" passing by the Borden's house (no mention of screen door as I remember it). The sight and smell upset her, and she ran to the Kelly's yard to vomit (she knew her place - the Bordens would have complained).

I think its best be familiar with the books before commenting. I haven't read any in 2+ years, and really want something different now.

Also, you are well-advised to read some true crime books about criminal behavior, or detective novels (which are based on fact, else they would be fantasies).

Remember, we live in a dynamic changing world. A person may witness one thing one minute, then a minute later be at another location.
That answers 'mbhenty'.

Audrey @ Fri May 05, 2006 2:09 pm wrote:This theory is the basis of Arnold Brown's book.

That comment is totally wrong. Arnold Brown was retired and living in FLA (READ his book!). He met Lewis Peterson, the son-in-law of Henry Hawthorne, and showed him Hawthorne's memoirs of the case. Too bad some people can't accurately quote a book.

Brown became interested enough to spend a lot of time researching this case, checking out the facts (as far as possible), and then writing the book that 'solved' the mystery. In so far as anyone can.
Brown invented nothing about this case, he did more research. Brown said Hawthorne first announced this in the 1950s (?). Nobody has any newspaper quotes about this?

If the impossible has been ruled out, then whatever remains, however improbable, must be the solution.

You can't cancel out from "Post a reply" even if you make a mistake!!!

OK, the presence of Ellan Eagan at the Bordens' is not subject to controversy. She was there, and saw something. Just what it was IS the controversy.

I believe Brown's solution is the 'final chapter'. BUT, the fact remains that according to the memoirs, Eagan withheld comment about the man seen there. It reminds me of a very fallible 'recovered memory'.
Note the staid explanation of Ellan's visit to the Kelly's. Going to the privy (unmentionable?), or just to vomit (the memoirs in the book?). You decide.

Thanks for your post Ray: But I have no idea what you mean when you said that, "I think it best to be Familiar with a book before commenting." I did not elaborate on any book. I was simply posing a questions, not making a comment. I was exercising my ignorance and curiosity, not flexing my mental acuity or wit.

So "that answers mbhenty" does not answer mbhenty.

The Kelly house was on the opposite side of the Borden property to where the screen door was located. So, my question still remains.

I may not have my facts right in many of my posts, but this my friend, I know of what I speak. I have been in the Borden house. I have walked the Kelly property. And, unless you are in the far end of the back yard, you can not see the side door, not even from there. You may see someone walking from that direction? Check out the illustration on page 179 of Pearson's "Trial" and you tell me.

Nice try Ray, but doen't answer my question. I could have given a better response if I was licking colored dots from small parchment.

Will it ever end?

I know, I know, Sorry Harry, just had to..........of course it is just a tease you see. I mean nothing by it, but it would be a lie if I did not admit that I had my punching gloves on. But, though in good fun, I must concure that it does get a bit tiring.

But one must admit, it goes up everybodys............., except Ray. I think he finds humor in his teasing and can only imagine him laughing as he pushes the last key and submits. Perhaps the joke's on us? (no offense Ray)

But my question was sincere. If you take a look at Pearson's, Trail of Lizzie Borden, you will see that one cannot see the side door of the Borden side entrance. My question was a frank one and not meant to stir up controversy, just an exchange of ideas. I know little to nothing about Ellan's assertions to having seen somone come out the side entrance.

But I have walked the Kelly yard during my working days, but could not get any sort of prespective since the Leary Press took up the entire area.

But if there was no other proof to what the women witnessed, I can see it all being dismissed. At the very least the defense would have ran with it if they thought her worthy. Probably not. Or else, as Kat has mentioned, the press would have been all over her. No?

So my humble apology Harry.

Harry @ Sat May 06, 2006 11:51 am wrote:Will it ever end?

I know what you mean Harry. Michael, I do not believe it was you who owes the apology. I know how hard it can be to not try and go into a defense type of mode when something is judged with a seemingly unnecessary tone.

We know that a parasite can only survive when it has a host. No matter how tempting the urge to respond to unwarranted negativity may be, we must remember:



Tracy...

Mike, NO apologies to me are necessary. My post had nothing to do with you. It's the rudeness shown to what others post that I find offensive. That know-it-all attitude that adds NOTHING to civil discussion. Will that ever end?

You are 100% correct. Unless you are Superman and have x-ray vision you cannot see the side door through the Borden house from the Kelly side. If the killer exited the side door to the left there is no way anyone could see him leave from the back yard as there is that famous jog in the path from the barn to the side steps.

If anyone left the Borden house then the large number of people on Second St. that morning must have all been blind. Funny how they noticed a great deal, all except some stinking, long-coated lunatic killer. Maybe the Triffids landed! (For those that seen the movie "The Day of the Triffids") In addition to their mutual blindness all their olfactory systems must have shut down at the same time.

And you are right about the defense. Surely if they had a witness who was half believable who saw a wild-looking man leave the house they would have called her to testify. Oh, that's right - Jennings was in on the conspiracy too. Cancel that one.

oops

Opps!

oops

oops

I think it's interesting that there were 2 Eagans supposedly there- see John Eagan in Hoffman's book. He has them both associated with an Owen Eagan.. Terence had written Prof Hoffman to ask the clarification of that relationship.

Also interesting is that the paper said first that Ellan was there Friday.
"On Friday [Thursday] morning she had occasion to go down to make some purchase..."--Boston Herald, August 11, 1892: 2.

Thanks for the input everyone, interesting. Subscribing to the belief that someone other than persons living in the house actually did the murders, it is easy for me to latch onto stories such as Egan's.

(My Everlast's are back on the nail.)

Well, snokkums started this topic and we've responded- so now I'm interested in: what does she think?
Did you form an opinion, snokkums? Do you feel as if you learned anything?

Let me make myself perfectly clear. I did not intend to create a controversy over 'mbhenty' remarks, or unintentionally insult.

All I really want to do is to note that Ellan Eagan was returning from the market, and passed the Borden house walking east (hope my directions is correct). Anyone who did that would have passed by the carriage entrance to the Borden yard, seen someone there and the screen door, then continued to walk by the Kelly yard.

I think the Secret Visitor is the best solution, even if "it can't be proved" by anyone today. If you read some True Crime stories, you'd understand. I remember an Ann Rule book about a woman who disappered from her apartment around 6pm. A relative came over, and found her missing. The husband, at work, had an iron-clad alibi. When the detectives questioned the other residents of the apartment house, one woman said a stranger came around asking a question about somebody (her husband was at home). I think it possible for a criminal to knock on doors until he finds a victim. When the person has no connection to the victim then the detection is very difficult. Or so I read.

The only reservation I have about Ellan Eagan's memoirs is that she apparently NEVER told anyong about it at the time!!! Years later recalling a suspicious individual is not the best evidence, especially when the individual committed suicide by first poisoning himself then climbing a tree to hang himself!!! Now THAT is suspicious.

Thanks for the response Ray.

That tells me something I did not know, that Ellan was walking by the Borden residence just before becoming sick. I thought that she was inside the Kelly yard, and that she was "visiting/or/living" there, and became sick while in the yard. If Ellan was walking up second street past the Borden place and towards the Kelly place, well, that paints a different picture about what she seen and how she happen to see it.

Oh yes, if I could sail my boat up second street past the Borden place, towards the kelly place, I would be sailing S-SW, mostly S (south) and usually referred to in that direction.

(The rear of 92 faces East. The front door faces West and the Screen door faces North. give or take a couple of degrees)

I to am of the belief that there is a good possibility that someone entered killed the Abbey, loitered with Lizzie's graces, killed Andrew and left.

Or, at the very least, Lizzie did the murders and someone helped, taking away the bloody dress and Ax.

After all, right after the murders Bridget was running around the country side on Lizzie's instructions. Everyone else has their own theory. I can fully appreciate and respect that, and am always happy to hear them.

Thanks Ray...........

If I had to choose an accomplice for Lizzie, assuming that she committed the murders, I would have to look at Bridget first. She is the most "efficient" person available. She is the only other person in the house whose presence is not questionable. She simultaneously provides one more person to commit the crime, or at least cover it up, and one less person to stumble over.

I have to wonder how used to Lizzies "spells" or "quirks" the household members were. If the answer to Lizzie's indiscretions was to bail her out each time, Andrew paying for her shoplifting and not following through with the robbery for instance, maybe the knee-jerk reaction to Lizzie holding a blood-dripping hatchet was to cover her butt. If Bridget discovered this, perhaps her first reaction was to look for a carpet to sweep the evidence under. This was what everyone did when Lizzie was "quirking", the precedent had been set by others. It wouldn't be the first time a twenty-odd year old made a bad decision in the heat of the moment. She would have realized how deep the trouble was after she found out Abby was dead.

Even if I never read Arnold Brown's book, common sense would suggest a Unknown Subject. If Bridget was not a suspect after the first day, and Lizzie was correctly acquitted, then it would have to be Someone Else.

There were no bloodstains on either Bridget or Lizzie, and no murder weapon found. W. Mark Felt tells about one murder of an elderly couple. They traced the person they hired to drive their car. He disliked their backseat driving, turned into a country lane, then chopped them up with a hatchet. He then kept the bloody hatchet, which was in his possession.
'Those who kill with a weapon will often hang onto it because it acquires great sentimental value.'

Have you ever known any WW II vets who kept the pistol they acquired from the soldier they killed in action? (Or won it in a crap game and remembered a good story?)

It was the first I had seen of a woman named ellan egan and over at the kelly's house and seeing something. I didn't think she saw anything either, with her being sick and all.

But Harry did clear up something for me. With where the side door is on the Borden's house where it is, Ellen couldn't have seen anything from the Kelly's back yard. Thanks Harry!

snokkums @ Wed May 10, 2006 6:31 am wrote:It was the first I had seen of a woman named ellan egan and over at the kelly's house and seeing something. I didn't think she saw anything either, with her being sick and all.

But Harry did clear up something for me. With where the side door is on the Borden's house where it is, Ellen couldn't have seen anything from the Kelly's back yard. Thanks Harry!

As far as I know, Arnold Brown was the first to mention the presence of Ellan Eagan. If you read his book you would learn a lot, and be able to comment with more authority. So far, it is the final solution to this mystery.

Vomiting seems to have been a popular pastime in and around the Borden house. Was this a Victorian affectation of some sort? The "ceremonial yak of recognition", perhaps?

The lack of refrigeration, combined with Andrew's apparent refusal to throw anything even remotely edible away, resulted in many foodborne illnesses in that house. These were common in the day anyway, there had just been a grueling hot spell, it was still hot in August, yummy several day old lamb stew for breakfast, so away we go...Ellan Eagan's sickness was descibed by Brown as being her reaction to seeing "the devil" Bill Borden and inhaling his unique horse urine stench...I've seen news accounts where it was ascribed to her having taken some pills...in any event she saw "him" then got sick...It all gets mixed up with Lizzie's apparent attempt to purchase Prussic Acid, but remember, she failed to procure it, so "poisoning by prussic acid" was a non starter. Laughably, the defense pointed out that no prussic acid was found in the stomachs of the victims. It would have instantly killed anyone at the first, never making it to the stomach. This was Lizzie's attempt to have a defense against Bill if things went south for her during the planned meeting with him and their devoted Dad. Give her beloved half brother a nice cup of Prussic Tea if he got too wierd with her...but he was fine with her. She was a big help with the cellar door and all. But unknown to her til moments later, the old cow who had usurped his sainted cheating mothers position and the loathsome miser daddie-o had not come out of the get-together "a-head".

Well, this is the first time I have read about a new name in this case. None of the books I have read have mentioned the name of Mrs Egan, not even in the index.

Also, MBHenty, I thought the Kelly house was actually opposite the Borden house (where the bus station is now, or was, when I visited Fall River in the late 1980s). I may be wrong about this and will have to consult Robert Sullivan's book for the map.

Jan @ Wed May 17, 2006 4:33 am wrote:Well, this is the first time I have read about a new name in this case. None of the books I have read have mentioned the name of Mrs Egan, not even in the index.

Also, MBHenty, I thought the Kelly house was actually opposite the Borden house (where the bus station is now, or was, when I visited Fall River in the late 1980s). I may be wrong about this and will have to consult Robert Sullivan's book for the map.

Jan, the house where the bus station is now was Dr. Bowen's house.

Yes Jan: As Allen stated, the Bowen house was across the street from the Borden house where the bus station now stands.

The Kelly house was to the South of the 92. That is to say, if you are facing the Borden house on Second Street the Kelly house was the small Cape on the right.

Thanks

This might be helpful:

Thanks everyone! I went home and consulted my copy of Judge Sullivan's book and, of course, you are quite right.

Is that where the famous Buff Orpington breed of chickens originated?
I understand they used to be popular in the 1890s for their looks as well as their eggs. I heard that New Englanders still favor the natural brown eggs (Rhode Island Reds).

Why does the map say at "X -Yard from where officers watched Borden house" ? Did that belong to Miller/Bowen? Were they involved in aiding the police against the surviving Bordens?

Edits= I can't spell tonight

Kat @ Fri May 19, 2006 11:48 pm wrote:Why does the map say at "X -Yard from where officers watched Borden house" ? Did that belong to Miller/Bowen? Were they involved in aiding the police against the surviving Bordens?

Edits= I can't spell tonight

That could be SOP keeping an eye on the house after the murders, to watch who entered or left. Any detective or mystery novel will explain how it works.
They would most likely be about 100 yards away, with binoculars and a video camera, to monitor the suspects or crime scene. Important to see but not be seen. IMO

Kat @ Fri May 19, 2006 11:48 pm wrote:Why does the map say at "X -Yard from where officers watched Borden house" ? Did that belong to Miller/Bowen? Were they involved in aiding the police against the surviving Bordens?

Yes Kat that is the Miller/Bowen lot on the south side of their house. I believe it had apple trees. The Boston Globe of August 11th had these lines:

"Nearly opposite, across the 50-foot street, is a double house occupied by Southard Miller and his son in-law, Dr. Bowen, while the high board fence beyond this house has been used by the police officers in shadowing the house."

Gee, being watched from across the street?
I wonder if Bowen let the Borden family know there were police camped out over in his yard to watch them? I wonder what that patrol saw or heard and how long they were there.


Thanks Harry.

Kat @ Sat May 27, 2006 10:35 pm wrote:Gee, being watched from across the street?
I wonder if Bowen let the Borden family know there were police camped out over in his yard to watch them? I wonder what that patrol saw or heard and how long they were there.


Thanks Harry.

There would be no reason for them to do so. IMO
There is the concept of a "mousetrap" going back to Louis XIV secret police. Don't arrest a suspect, just watch and then question anyone who visits the suspects. A good mystery novel (like the Perry Mason series) would explain how this works.