Lizzie Borden Society Forum

I may have asked this question before but here it goes.

Does anyone know if Lizzie asked for the hatchet head back after the trial was over? After all it was hers. Could she have received it or would it have to remain in the State's possession?

Here's another question(s): A. Did Lizzie ever identify that hatchet head as belonging to the family, B. did she ever say that she remembered seeing that hatchet before the day of the murders and C. did she say whether or not it was handleless before the day of the murders?

I may have missed it but I don't remember Lizzie ever talking about the hatchet as far as who it belonged to, did she ever use it and what condition it was in prior the the day of the killings and where it was kept. Bridget seemed to know where it was located but did Lizzie have any knowledge about it?

-1bigsteve (o:

Using the hatchet would involve work that was not likely done by Lizzie or Emma. They didn't ask for it because they didn't care for it. Andy would certainly seek a useful item, but not his now rich daughters. IMO

Besides, what releveance is it after the trial? Do the police return seized evidence in today's world?

Lizzie claimed ignorance regarding the hatchets and axes in the cellar. This is from her Inquest testimony, page 81:

"Q. Did you have any occasion to use the axe or hatchet?
A. No sir.
Q. Did you know where they were?
A. I knew there was an old axe down cellar; that is all I knew.
Q. Did you know anything about a hatchet down cellar?
A. No sir.
Q. Where was the old axe down cellar?
A. The last time I saw it it was stuck in the old chopping block.
Q. Was that the only axe or hatchet down cellar?
A. It was all I knew about.
Q. When was the last you knew of it?
A. When our farmer came to chop wood."

I don't think Lizzie was ever asked specifically about the handleless hatchet head.

Bridget also denied knowledge of the hatchets. Trial 253:

"Q. Had you ever seen a hatchet with a broken handle about the premises?
A. No, sir, I did not see any hatchet. I had no occasion to see any of them.
Q. A hatchet with the handle broken off close to the blade of the hatchet. Had you ever seen such a thing?
A. No, sir, I did not."

Yet, it was Bridget who led the officers to the room where the box containing the hatchets were kept. We do know that Bridget did use a hatchet on at least one occasion, to remove the heel from one of her shoes.

The handleless hatchet head ended up in Jenning's hip bath collection and was eventually donated to the Fall River Historical Society. From that I assume it was turned over to either Lizzie and Emma or Jennings.

There was a bunch of stuff from the trial that was put in a trunk and then I believe the police or the court told the Bordens to come get it- it belonged to them. It sounds like they didn't bother or sent Jennings to pick it up instead.
That's been my impression. It was in a news item.
Maybe Harry can scan newspapers for a "trunk?"

Anyway- I thnk that's how Jennings ended up with the *Collection* maybe. It's my supposition.

Lizzie supposedly directed Bridget to take the officers to the hatchets and axes.
Emma was also asked about these implements.
Do you have Emma's testimony, BigSteve?

Thank you, Harry and Kat. It looks like Lizzie did know something about those hatchets. I had been wondering about that.

No I don't have Emma's testimony but I'll search for it here in the archives and look it over.

Thanks again.

-1bigsteve (o:

Barbara Ashton, in her article in the Proceedings book has this to say (p212):

"The hip-bath collection is an assortment of material collected by Lizzie Borden's lawyer, Andrew Jennings, for her defense. It includes evidence presented at the trial, handwritten notes concerning the case, minutes of the preliminary court hearing and other items considered important for Lizzie's defense. The entire collection was sequestered by Andrew Jennings immediately after the trial in 1893, and was not seen publicly until it was given to the Fall River Historical Society in 1968. ..."

Since there is nothing in the collection of material value, I cannot imagine either Lizzie or Emma wanting anything returned. Especially a handleless hatchet head.

Thanks Harry.

My original thought about Lizzie asking for the return of the hatchet head was that she may have wanted it back to keep it from being "paraded" around in public as "her murder weapon." I guess the papers were not as sensationalistic then as they are now but I had wondered if Lizzie may have wanted to keep a lid on the whole affair after the trial. But then again, Lizzie's attempt to rein in the "evidence" may have made her look guilty in the public's eye, like she had something to hide. On the other hand she may have thought they were safe in Jenning's possession.

I sure wish I could have crawled into Lizzie's brain.

-1bigsteve (o:

1bigsteve @ Sun Oct 22, 2006 11:08 am wrote:I sure wish I could have crawled into Lizzie's brain.

-1bigsteve (o:

LOL, as long as you could get back out again!

Here is the place to get your red hot official testimony! Free to anyone!

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

The Boston Globe, Wednesday, June 21, 1893 - 1, 2, 4, 5, 6

NOT GUILTY.


..."Then the officer of the rear entrance told to the assembled multitude a little diplomatic fairy tale about how he thought the woman had departed from the court house by the front way. Of course she hadn't done any such thing.

Of course she was still within. But the honest face of that New Bedford policeman did its work in conjunction with his tale and scores out of the hundreds turned away and went homeward.

Next an express wagon arrived, and into it was dumped a trunk, several boxes and that old lounge on which Andrew Borden was killed, the blood spots being concealed beneath a wrapping of cloth. Those boxes and that trunk contained the 'exhibits,' from A to Z, hatchets, axes, old iron and lead, and so on, those 'exhibits' which hardly reached the jury at all after their retirement.

The ghoulish, ghastly lot of stuff was carted off."

--There is more about the trunk but I haven't found it yet.
Thanks Harry!

Kat @ Tue Oct 24, 2006 3:29 am wrote:Here is the place to get your red hot official testimony! Free to anyone!

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

How very kind and generous! Does it contain a dictionary for 1892/3 usage? Remember "slippers"?

I have an 1897 Funk and Wagnalls, that is 5" thick if we need something looked up.

Kat @ Sat Oct 28, 2006 5:12 am wrote:I have an 1897 Funk and Wagnalls, that is 5" thick if we need something looked up.

Thanks for the offer. How does it define "slippers"?
Don't forget there was more local definitions in those days, IMO.