Lizzie Borden Society Forum

I don't know if this has been referenced elsewhere, but I thought it might generate some interest and discussion.

From the Fall River Daily Evening News, September 25, 1884:

“Personal — Missis Emma L and Lizzie A daughters of Andrew J Borden Esq leave for Boston to-day with friends to join a Raymond party on a trip through Northern New England .”

Raymond’s Vacation Excursions was a Boston-based travel company that conducted guided tours through-out Northern New England and Canada. One of their more popular destinations were the White Mountains in New Hampshire where guests stayed at the Crawford House. The company gradually expanded their services to include the western U.S., including Colorado and California. The company provided first-class service to its clients, including lodging at the finest hotels and resorts and travel in private cars. All traveling expenses were included.

A Raymond’s Vacation Excursions schedule, published in the Boston Evening Transcript on Aug. 18, 1884, shows a tour departing on September 27, 1884 for a seven day trip to Northern New England & Canada. This would have been the likely tour that Emma, Lizzie and friends joined.

On August 3, 1882, The Boston Evening Transcript gave a lengthy review of “Raymond Excursion, Number Four” through Northern New England & Canada.

According to the article, “The cost of the round-trip was fifty dollars. We stopped at the best hotels, had comfortable carriages and no crowding, every attention and willing service.”

The total cost of the trip for both sisters would have been $100.00. The price would be equivalent to almost $3,000 today.

On August 29, 1890, while Lizzie was on her Grand European tour, this item appeared in the Fall River Daily Evening News:

“Miss Emma Borden is enjoying a Raymond excursion through the White Mountains.”

Could the sisters have afforded to pay for these trips themselves? Was Emma’s solo trip a small consolation gift from Andrew for Lizzie’s grand tour?

With what little we know of Lizzie's personal finances at the time of the Europe trip, it is difficult to construct how she could have fully self-funded the trip. Her ~$200 per year allowance (presuming the 1892 amount was given for many years before), would not seem to be the answer.

I can readily get my head around the scenario that Lizzie WANTED (aka deserved) to go on the Europe trip and AJB 'caved' to avoid family drama. He had already set a precedent of willingness to spend meaningful $ to quiet things down with the Ferry St. house 'gift' just a couple years before.

Emma appears to be less willing to confront her father (per Hiram Harrington) and I can imagine her being good with the lessor trip to ensure Lizzie's satisfaction and to avoid 'piling on' with demands on her father. Of course, in a further nod to Lizzie, Emma swapped bedrooms with lizzie upon her return from Europe.

Why can't the answer be that Andrew just bestowed this trip on Emma and Lizzie out of the goodness of his heart. 1884 was before the Whitehead house drama of 1887. And, as you state, while Lizzie is on her grand tour, Emma goes on a seven-day excursion. Andrew did a lot of good things for his family in his lifetime. How he got the unearned reputation as a horrible, tight-fisted man is the question.

Stefani -- I have never in any post ever said or implied that AJB was tight fisted. What I said is that from my interpretation of the family dynamics, Lizzie going to Europe and Emma to upper New England during the same timeline makes sense.

Are we thinking that Emma didn't want to accompany Lizzie on the Europe trip? Can't speak for other parents experiences with gifting to their kids, but I would never get away with gifts of such massive incomparability. So in my POV, there is more to the story than a dad simply giving his daughters a couple trips.

Actually, the point of my post was that Andrew was not the miser of legend he’s been made out to be. The Raymond excursion of 1884 was an example of that. In all likelihood, Andrew picked up the tab for it. There were probably many instances of Andrew's indulgences toward his daughters that we'll never know about. I believe Andrew, despite his own frugality, wanted his daughters to be happy and have a good life. But what constituted “a good life” in Andrew’s mind was not necessarily the one his daughters envisioned...especially Lizzie.

Perhaps Emma had the opportunity to accompany Lizzie on the European tour in 1890 but declined simply because Lizzie’s traveling companions were Lizzie’s circle of church friends. It’s doubtful Emma had much in common with them based on interests and age; Emma was not known to be an avid churchgoer at that time, nor was she involved in any of Lizzie’s church activities.

While Lizzie would have thrived in the whirlwind of a European tour (and apparently did), I believe Emma was more of an introvert and a homebody. Emma may have preferred the more sedate, White Mountain travel option for which Andrew was willing to pay.

Thanks for the discussion!

Good points Cagney.

I think all on this thread agree that Andrew was not a miser in the negative sense.

The backdrop of the Europe/New England trips can be interpreted multiple ways.

I read, at least, an element of aspiration in Lizzie’s desire to travel Europe—whether to the lifestyle, the culture, or the social prominence of the other women she travelled with. It could be Emma was disinclined to also go; it could also be that Andrew was pacifying Lizzie by only offering this much more expensive trip to her. Or, perhaps this trip was to be comparable to the schooling Emma received, which, for whatever reason, Lizzie did not.
I read Lizzie as manipulative, and doubt the European trip was an exception to that. Whether she learned that from Andrew, and he was also working toward his own end of mollifying her, is a logical inference.
Enjoying this thread—thanks for scouting out that article about the New England travel, CagneyBT!

Hi Reasonwhy! Thank you for joining the discussion!

I agree with you that Lizzie was manipulative as a way of climbing the Fall River social ladder. She had a false sense of grandiosity, a trait that Emma, Andrew and Abbie all lacked. I think the whole family bent over backward to appease her, but it was never enough. They were, in a sense, hostages to Lizzie’s wants and needs.

I agree you CagneyBT that Andrew was not the miser he has been portrayed as. What I guess I was trying to say is that there probably wasn't a tit for tat between the sisters and what Andrew gifted them. Lizzie had her grand tour, Emma had her year and a half at Wheaton College. Emma was fairly well traveled in her life after the murders (and even went to Mardi Gras at one point). Lizzie traveled later to Washington DC almost yearly. Emma also went to Scotland, was it? So if the sisters wanted something, within reason I assume, they could have it.

But I disagree with Lizzie being manipulative and having a false sense of grandiosity. Lulu's diaries in Parallel Lives show us that Lizzie was invited to parties and given opportunities to be social with her set, but, for some reason, didn't much participate. While other girls her age were being courted, Lizzie was not. She seemed the homebody who attended to her social responsibilities (church work, etc.) but wasn't fancy free in any way, and thus not like many of her peers. Alice Russell was a year younger than Emma, so eight years older than Lizzie. She became the woman Lizzie turned to when the murders occurred.

I don't see what you see about Lizzie at all. But that's what makes this case so darned interesting. You see her one way and I another. And who is to say the truth of it all?

Question: where did you read, Reasonwhy, that Lizzie was manipulative? Do you remember? Curious about that one.

BTW: The off-Broadway musical/opera Lizzie portrays a totally manipulative Lizzie that works perfectly within the context of the play. But that is fiction. And if you ever get a chance to see a production, you MUST see it. The portrayal of Bridget and Alice Russell is SO DAMN GOOD!

Couple of interesting personal items in the Fall River paper regarding the 1890 travels by the sisters.

Fall River Daily Evening News Sep 3, 1890
Mrs. W. A. Borden and Miss Lizzie A. Borden returned yesterday from a four weeks’ outing at Watkins Glen, Niagara Falls, and Saratoga

For this to be accurate there must have been more than one Lizzie A. Borden in Fall River or Emma and Lizzie's names were mixed up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fall River Daily Evening News Nov 3, 1890
Personal
* District Attorney Knowlton was in town yesterday.
* Misses Ellen Shove, Anna Borden, Carrie Borden, Lizzie Brayton and Lizzie Borden returned home from a European trip.

How ironic, that a very brief "Personal" section has just two items. Knowlton and Lizzie, but in 1890, not 1892....little did they know how their paths would cross.

Hi Stefani!

As you said, no one knows the truth of it all. Differing opinions are always inevitable in a case as fascinating as this. With that said, I respect your knowledge and insight. We can still agree to disagree. It’s all good!

I think “within reason” is the key phrase here. Andrew was willing to indulge his daughters to an extent. But I believe Lizzie, in particular, was never satisfied.

Alice Russell was pretty direct about this in her inquest testimony:

Q. What was the difference in their natures?
A. Mr. Borden was a plain living man with rigid ideas, and very set. They were young girls. He had earned his money, and he did not care for the things that young women in their position naturally would; and he looked upon those things----I don't know just how to put it.

Q. He did not appreciate girls?
A. No, I don't think he did.

Q. Their ideas were more modern than his with regard to the way of living, do you mean?
A. Yes, Sir.

Q. How did you get this, from the girl talk, or what you observed?
A. From what I observed. Everyone knew what Andrew Borden's ideas were. He was a very plain living man; he did not care for anything different. It always seemed to me as if he did not see why they should care for anything different.

Q. Did they complain about it?
A. Yes, they used to think it ought to be different; there was no reason why it should not be. They used to think it might be different.

Q. Lizzie or Emma, or both?
A. Both.

Q. There never was any wrangling between them?
A. No, I never heard any.They had quite refined ideas, and they would have liked to have been cultured girls, and would like to have had different advantages, and it would have been natural for girls to express themselves that way. I think it would have been very unnatural had they not.

Q. He did not give them the advantages of education that they thought they ought to have had?
A. I don't know as it is just that; but people cannot go and do and have, unless they have ample means to do it.


You mentioned Lizzie not courting as her friends did. Perhaps men simply weren’t interested in her, whether it was because of her personality or her social status. Wasn’t there an incident at the “Welcome Home” reception in 1890 where Anna & Carrie Borden had to scramble to get Lizzie an escort home?

You mentioned her childhood friend, Louisa Holmes Stillwell (Luli). As you know, Lizzie may have attended Luli’s wedding in 1882 The wedding was described as a “brilliant affair” and included music by The Germania Orchestra of Boston and a banquet by the renowned New York caterer, Pinaro.

This was the wedding of “a cultured girl.” This, according to Alice, is what Lizzie wanted for herself. Would Andrew have paid for such an extravagance should Lizzie or Emma wed?

Lizzie couldn’t help seeing the sharp contrast between the lives her wealthy friends were enjoying and her own drab existence on Second St.

Perhaps she was manifesting her unhappiness in ways that were becoming alarming. So, to pacify her, Andrew tried to keep the peace with various gifts. The gifts may have included the Raymond Excursion and others that we’ll never know about.

I believe this was a continuous pattern..manipulation by Lizzie and capitulation by Andrew. The gifts got even more extravagant, culminating in the Grand Tour of Europe.

It was reported that Lizzie dreaded returning home from the European tour. Despite Andrew’s efforts, she’s was still miserable. The atmosphere at Second St. may have turned toxic. So the family took even more steps to pacify her:

• • Andrew buys back the Ferry St. property
  • Emma gives up her larger room to Lizzie
  • Lizzie is allowed to chose the paint color for the house

It was all for naught. As long as both Andrew and Abbie were alive and controlling the purse strings, Lizzie “couldn’t go and do and have” as Alice Russell stated.

Of course, that all changed after Aug. 4, 1892 when Lizzie and Emma finally got “the ample means” they always desired.

This is all speculation. Just my 2 cents for what it’s worth.

Thanks for the discussion, Stefani!

P.S. - That Lizzie Borden musical sounds like a hoot!

Hi Stefani,

Thanks for the recommendation of the Lizzie musical. Based on your enthusiasm, I will watch it (think I have seen it offered on YouTube).
I have read nearly everything available about Lizzie in the 47 years since I was first introduced to her case in the Elizabeth Montgomery movie, so hard for me to pin down all sources who also may have found her to be manipulative. But here are some of my own observations of when she sought to manipulate:

1. Lizzie’s manner of answering Knowlton in the inquest. She obfuscated and caused confusion by often changing her testimony; by claiming she didn’t even know Knowlton’s name; by her frequent use of the pronouns “someone” and “they,” she tried to create the impression of personal distance.

2. She tried to direct suspicion away from herself by often mentioning having seen men around the house and in angry business exchanges with Andrew.

3. Lizzie’s visit to Alice the night before, in which she set up Alice to be a supporting witness to #2, above. Also, re Alice, Lizzie asking, “How could you let me do it?” after the burning of the dress. Lizzie is manipulating Alice (and possibly Emma, too) into a sense of guilt by deflecting blame onto them. Additionally, re Alice, I believe Lizzie tried to manipulate Alice into a state of fear, to get her to leave the Borden house, by putting Andrew’s club under the elders’ bed when Alice slept there (Alice testified she had not seen it there before).

4. Lizzie manipulated others into finding the slain Abby.

5. Lizzie tried to implicate Hiram Harrington by saying he was her father’s only known enemy (after his interview criticizing Lizzie).

6, Lizzie’s statement that “Bridget didn’t do it.” She may have been trying to manipulate opinion toward Morse’s guilt.

7. Lizzie manipulated Bowen into defending the innocence of bloody towels in the basement pail.

8. Lizzie’s use of “the silent treatment” toward Emma in the jail (after the “Why did you give me up?” conversation). Lizzie (and Emma) also used this manipulative passive-aggressive punishment by not attending meals with the elders, and speaking as little as possible to Abby.

9. The last example I’ll mention—though I can think of more —is Lizzie not calling Abby “mother” anymore after Andrew gifted Abby one-half of her stepmother and half-sister’s house. She manipulated Andrew into giving the sisters an equal gift by revoking title to the only mother she had ever known.

Hope I haven’t made you sorry you asked! Now, I’m wondering how you can see her as not manipulative? And, I too, am truly curious about your perspective.

Hi Camgarsky!

The first news item from Sept. 1890 is a different Lizzie A. Borden. That Lizzie was born in 1875, the daughter of William Borden & Mary Roper.The family lived on North Main Street. She married in October 1893. The minister who performed the ceremony was Rev. William Walker Jubb...yep, the same Rev. Jubb who supported our Lizzie throughout her trial.

And speaking of a small world...According to the 1880 census, there was another Lizzie Borden, b. 1855, daughter of William Borden, who lived at...drum roll...168 Second Street! Her actual name was Elizabeth Ella Borden. She married Charles Wilmath & died in 1908.

The second news item from Nov. 1890 was related to Lizzie's return from her Grand Tour.
I agree with you..the reference to D.A. Knowlton is eerily prophetic

Cagney -- thanks for confirming the multiple Lizzie A. Borden's in Fall River.

Reasonwhy wrote: Wed Jun 29, 2022 9:45 pm Hope I haven’t made you sorry you asked! Now, I’m wondering how you can see her as not manipulative? And, I too, am truly curious about your perspective.

I see your use of the word manipulate and my idea of the word are a bit different. This explains it to me.

To me, manipulate means getting someone to DO something or change the way they see something based on a lie. "Control or influence cleverly, unfairly, or unscrupulously."

Diverting attention, to me anyway, isn't manipulation.

But I do see, now, how your use of the words fits into your narrative of the case. Thank you greatly for the clarification!

CagneyBT wrote: Thu Jun 30, 2022 12:15 am Hi Camgarsky!

And speaking of a small world...According to the 1880 census, there was another Lizzie Borden, b. 1855, daughter of William Borden, who lived at...drum roll...168 Second Street! Her actual name was Elizabeth Ella Borden. She married Charles Wilmath & died in 1908.

The second news item from Nov. 1890 was related to Lizzie's return from her Grand Tour.
I agree with you..the reference to D.A. Knowlton is eerily prophetic

Her actual name was Ella Elizabeth Borden. It wasn't uncommon at the time for people to use their middle name as a nickname.

Ella Elizabeth Borden was born August 2, 1854 in Wareham, Mass to William H. and Lovica Ann (Tripp) Borden. Ella’s siblings were Ruth G., Helen M., Almira, Grace D., Minnie and Durfee P. Borden. Ella is referred to by her middle name, either Elizabeth or Lizzie, in some census records. Ella E. Borden married Charles H. Wilmarth on November 24, 1874 in Fall River. The Borden family was living at 130 Second in 1874. William H. Borden's occupation given as nailer, the same as it was on his marriage certificate and the 1870 Census. Charles H. Wilmart lived at 168 Second working as an engineer. Ella's mother, Lovica, was born in Westport November 17, 1832 and died December 13, 1875 of consumption at 168 Second. Her father William was born in Fall River on March 31, 1830 and died of consumption on September 8, 1886. Charles and Ella had two children named Ruth Adelaide and William Borden Wilmarth. Ella died October 19, 1908 with a cause of death listed as heart disease on the death certificate. Her address was 77 Hanover. The informant is her sister Mrs. Felix Crankshaw (Grace D. Borden). Bright’s disease with complications is mentioned in her obit. Ella Wilmarth was buried in Oak Grove Cemetery on October 22, 1908.

Charles H. WIlmarth lived at 168 Second from about 1874- until at least 1878. Occupation Engineer.
By 1880 they had moved to 41 Linden. Charles is an Engineer at Union Cotton Manufacturing.
By1892 they are living at 11 Hanover.


William H. Borden was the son of Durfee Borden and Grace V. Read.
Lovica A. Tripp was the daughter of Lyman Tripp and Almira Borden.