Lizzie Borden Society Forum

And I apologize in advance if these questions have already been asked/answered a few dozen times already!

I was just watching a show on TV about the Borden murders, and I wondered, once again, why Lizzie didn't seize the opportunity, when she was being questioned by the police, to implicate poor Bridget in the murders? We know how stratified society was back then...a wealthy Borden vs. a poor Irish Catholic servant girl--no doubt about who would have been believed! So why was Lizzie so quick to insist that Bridget had nothing whatever to do with either murder? It wouldn't have had to be an outright accusation, even...just a carefully timed hesitation, some feigned uncertainty--and the police would have been all over poor Bridget. Lizzie wasn't stupid, she had to have known that she would be suspected, so why not at least try to deflect some suspicion onto a poor Irish maid?

Another question, not really related to the first but I'm curious. The show I was watching stated that Bridget was illiterate. That possibility hadn't even occurred to me. I don't know what growing up poor in a large Irish family was like in the 19th century---was illiteracy that common? Esp. among girls? I would have thought that Bridget was at least somewhat literate...does anyone know??? (And if she truly was illiterate, she wouldn't have known whether Mrs. Borden received a note from anyone or not that fatal morning!)

Okay, just one more question. I know that after Bridget married another Sullivan and was living in Montana, when she thought she was dying she sent for a close female friend, saying she had something important to tell her. By the time the friend arrived, Bridget's condition had improved considerably and she obviously had decided she was going to live, so she never "confessed" anything to her friend. (Which I find endlessly frustrating--I would love to know what mattered so much, she wanted to get it off her chest before she died!! ) A few years later, Bridget fell sick again and this time she did die--was her death that sudden? Why didn't she "confess" whatever it was to someone as she had clearly wanted to before?

I'd love to hear everyone's thoughts on these questions cause they're driving me crazy--I mean, crazier than usual!

If an innocent person returned to the house and found Bridget alive and her father dead, who should she first suspect of the murder? If she didn't know for certain one way or the other, why say anything at all about Bridget's guilt or innocence? She had the option to keep her trap shut and let the chips fall where they may. The very last thing an innocent person would say under the circumstances is who did not commit the murders because knowing that is incriminating. If Lizzie was attempting to manipulate the investigation, excusing herself and Bridget would probably focus suspicion on John Morse. Lizzie was likely unaware he would have an airtight alibi at the time she was excusing Bridget.

Yes, NES

The story about Bridget's death bed confession is very interesting. I would love to investigate that story. Of course much time has passed, and as more goes by, finding reliable sources can become impossible.

Bridget"s friend was one Minnie Green. Supposedly Minnie and Bridget came over from Ireland on the same ship. It would be difficult finding Minnie since we need her real name. Minnie was probably short for another name, such as Willamina. Also her last name is believed to be her married name. It is believed that she was a single girl when she immigrated to America.

Did Minnie exist? It is believed she did.

Did she really run to Bridget's death bed to hear Bridget's confession?

First we must discover where the story was first heard.

This was first mentioned by Edward Radin, who claimed to have investigated it and gotten the story from a Miss Mollie O' Meara of the Bute Public Library. The story was stolen by Frank Spearing and Victoria Lincoln and appears in their accounts. Too spicy a story to be passed up by the raconteur Spearing and the fabulist Victoria Lincoln.

Mollie told the story to Radin. By that time Bridget and Minnie were dead. So, did it really happen. Can we trust Radin—his judgement, investigation, his creditability?

You be the Judge. Just remember this.

If true, Bridget told Minnie, Minnie told Ms. O'Meara, Ms. O' Meara told Radin, and Radin told us. All are dead, and whether Bridget really had a bedside confession is all speculation. Especially since Minnie had no idea what Bridget wanted to tell her.

Was the confession all conjecture on Minnie's part?

Also, we can not mention the confession without mentioning the story Radin gives about Lizzie receiving enough money from Lizzie to buy a farm in Ireland.

To believe all this you must believe Edward Radin.

I take it all with a grain of salt, and a pinch of fiction.

Fun to talk about, but there is no proof.

It is entirely possible that Bridget was illiterate, or partially literate. I can't think of anything which would prove it offhand, but a thorough search of the primary source material might turn up something which states or implies that Bridget needed to have something read to her, or something else suggesting illiteracy. Illiteracy was common at that time, and ordinarily the poorest people were the most likely to receive the least schooling. I don't think illiteracy would impact Bridget's awareness of a note, if there was one. She would only have to know that a slip of paper arrived for Abby, she didn't have to know what was written on it.

I'm not so sure about illiteracy on Bridget's part. If Bridget could not read, it would make the whole "have you seen the sale at Sargent's" exchange between Lizzie and Bridget that much stranger. Why would Lizzie ask someone who couldn't read if they saw the sale in the newspaper?

Not only that instance, but Bridget saying she did not like what they were saying about her in the papers.

Did Lizzie ask Bridget if she had seen the ad for the sale? Every time I've read about this, it's always phrased as Lizzie telling Bridget "There is a cheap sale of dress goods at Sargeant's."

FWIW, though, I don't think Bridget was illiterate, at least not completely.

YES:

Below is what Bridget said about Sargent's as she sat (stood) at the stand in court....

We are left to consider that the only knowledge Bridget had of the sale at Sargent's was what Lizzie told her, not what she read.

It is still my opinion that I do not believe Bridget was illiterate. There are other indicators that lead me to believe this. Such as Bridget saying she did not like what they were saying about her in the papers. Someone could have read the statements to her, but I tend to think she could read. Also, when giving directions to Alice Russell's house she knew the names of the streets she had taken, and was given a street name to find the house. When describing where she had gone walking with her friend on the Wednesday night before the murders, she traced her route by the street names.

Yes, Allen, I'm inclined to believe that it would have been difficult for Bridget to survive, what with her voyages and work, if she did not have some rudimentary reading skills. Seems to me she would have had to handle money, be able to read labels, understand signs. She crossed the ocean once, then went back to Ireland, then came back to America, then made it out to Montana.

Didn't she work in a hotel before her employment Chez Borden? Wouldn't she have had to read room numbers?

I don't know how far she went in her Catholic instruction, but the nuns would have made certain that she knew how to read well enough to follow the Church's teachings, perhaps even to read The Bible.

As for the Sargent's ad, the point (certianly of the prosecution) was that Lizzie pointed out the sale to Bridget. Perhaps Bridget was not allowed to read the newspaper. Certainly not till Mr. Borden, Abby, Lizzie, and Emma had had a go at it.