Sunday, 7/18, 6am Eastern time, the History Channel will have on a half hour show titled, "History's Lost and Found".
One of the segments is "Lizzie Borden's hatchet"
TV show
Moderator: Adminlizzieborden
-
Kat
- Posts: 14785
- Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2003 11:59 pm
- Real Name:
- Location: Central Florida
-
theebmonique
- Posts: 2771
- Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2004 7:08 am
- Gender: Female
- Real Name: Tracy Townsend
- Location: Ogden, Utah
-
Harry
- Posts: 4061
- Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2003 4:28 pm
- Real Name: harry
- Location: South Carolina
It was only a short segment, about 6 to 7 minutes long.
It was only concerned with the handleless hatchet. Dennis Binnette(sp) and Prof. Ryckebusch were the only two persons who spoke. They gave a fairly accurate summary of the case but nothing in detail.
One interesting thing they showed was a very young (probably about 10) photo of Victoria Lincoln. There were several references to her book.
It was okay but way too brief.
It was only concerned with the handleless hatchet. Dennis Binnette(sp) and Prof. Ryckebusch were the only two persons who spoke. They gave a fairly accurate summary of the case but nothing in detail.
One interesting thing they showed was a very young (probably about 10) photo of Victoria Lincoln. There were several references to her book.
It was okay but way too brief.
-
Harry
- Posts: 4061
- Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2003 4:28 pm
- Real Name: harry
- Location: South Carolina
Alice, the handleless hatchet was one of the trial exhibits that Andrew J. Jennings took after the trial and placed in the "hip-bath" container. It was effectively lost from public view until the 1960's.Alice @ Mon Jul 19, 2004 3:35 pm wrote:Thank you, Harry! But I'm confused. Hasn't the handleless hatchet been at the FRHS for years? How is that 'lost and found'?
In 1968, it, along with some of the other items in the hip-bath collection were turned over to the Fall River Historical Society.
If you have a copy of the book Proceedings there is a lengthy article on the collection by Barbara M. Ashton.
The title of the TV show is mis-named not only on this item but others as well.
-
Kat
- Posts: 14785
- Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2003 11:59 pm
- Real Name:
- Location: Central Florida
Arthur Sherman Phillips, In Defence of Lizzie Borden:
"The mass of documents and other evidence collected by the defence have never been disclosed or discussed, due to the fact that until the recent death of Miss Borden their secrecy was, in the opinion of Mr. Jennings, important to her defence. He considered that reservation of such facts as would meet any new phase of police investigation was necessary, and that during her life it was improper to disclose or to discuss facts which were gathered in her interest, and which might by any possibility be important if crime should be reconsidered by the District Attorney."
--I guess Phillips considered the material that Jennings sequestered as *in reserve* for any future proceeding of the case. That included the photographs and the exhibits shown in court- the hatchet head and the bedspread- things like that.
"The mass of documents and other evidence collected by the defence have never been disclosed or discussed, due to the fact that until the recent death of Miss Borden their secrecy was, in the opinion of Mr. Jennings, important to her defence. He considered that reservation of such facts as would meet any new phase of police investigation was necessary, and that during her life it was improper to disclose or to discuss facts which were gathered in her interest, and which might by any possibility be important if crime should be reconsidered by the District Attorney."
--I guess Phillips considered the material that Jennings sequestered as *in reserve* for any future proceeding of the case. That included the photographs and the exhibits shown in court- the hatchet head and the bedspread- things like that.
-
lydiapinkham
- Posts: 428
- Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2004 3:01 pm
- Real Name:
- Location: new england
Kat, I remember coming across one bizarre item (on the forum or elsewhere, can't remember) about the return of the sofa by the police after an examination. What would the forensics of the day been looking for? Handprints, blood patterns, or weapons stashed in the lining? Is there anything about that in the hipbath? Today it would be routine (except for the return of the sofa), but what would they have done with it before luminol and DNA testing?
About the sealing of evidence: were they hoping to bring her up on an accesory charge?
--Lyddie
About the sealing of evidence: were they hoping to bring her up on an accesory charge?
--Lyddie
-
Kat
- Posts: 14785
- Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2003 11:59 pm
- Real Name:
- Location: Central Florida
Trial
Kieran
Page 114
RE-DIRECT
Q. (By Mr. Moody.) Did you make some measurements with respect to a sofa under the direction of Dr. Dolan?
A. I did.
Q. Will you state those now? The sofa was placed in position, was it not, in the sitting-room, and you made some measurements?
A. I did.
Q. Will you state those measurements?
MR. ROBINSON. You assume it was put in position?
MR. KNOWLTON. Hereafter evidence will be offered as to what the position was.
...............
Trial
Dolan
853
Q. And by the way, you have the sofa here?
A. Yes, sir.
_________
--This first part sounds like the sofa was brought into the sitting room and placed for Engineer Kieran's measurements and viewing, when he was there on the 16th of August.
Since the funeral was in the sitting room Saturday, maybe the sofa had been stored in the dining room with the bodies with the doors closed?
It was removed from the house and brought to the place of trial, then returned to the house. There is something about this in Rebello.
Since it was the defense who hoarded the pre-trial minutes and the trial exhibits, it might be construed that Lizzie's councel thought it was possible that the case might be reopened. These items might benefit Lizzie's defense even if someone else was brought on a charge.
I think it's possible the sofa was wanted in court to reenact the killing of Andrew. If it hadn't been re-covered yet, the shock value of bringing it into the courtroom would have been influential on the jury. They never exhibited it tho.
Kieran
Page 114
RE-DIRECT
Q. (By Mr. Moody.) Did you make some measurements with respect to a sofa under the direction of Dr. Dolan?
A. I did.
Q. Will you state those now? The sofa was placed in position, was it not, in the sitting-room, and you made some measurements?
A. I did.
Q. Will you state those measurements?
MR. ROBINSON. You assume it was put in position?
MR. KNOWLTON. Hereafter evidence will be offered as to what the position was.
...............
Trial
Dolan
853
Q. And by the way, you have the sofa here?
A. Yes, sir.
_________
--This first part sounds like the sofa was brought into the sitting room and placed for Engineer Kieran's measurements and viewing, when he was there on the 16th of August.
Since the funeral was in the sitting room Saturday, maybe the sofa had been stored in the dining room with the bodies with the doors closed?
It was removed from the house and brought to the place of trial, then returned to the house. There is something about this in Rebello.
Since it was the defense who hoarded the pre-trial minutes and the trial exhibits, it might be construed that Lizzie's councel thought it was possible that the case might be reopened. These items might benefit Lizzie's defense even if someone else was brought on a charge.
I think it's possible the sofa was wanted in court to reenact the killing of Andrew. If it hadn't been re-covered yet, the shock value of bringing it into the courtroom would have been influential on the jury. They never exhibited it tho.
-
lydiapinkham
- Posts: 428
- Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2004 3:01 pm
- Real Name:
- Location: new england
Ewwwww! The bloody couch would have been almost as macabre as the bouncing skull! The shock value theory makes sense. I didn't realize they were keeping it for the trial rather than for examination. I wonder if the sympathy shown Lizzie when she swooned over the drop of Pop made the prosecution give up the idea of bringing in the sofa. Shock tactics can backfire if the jury is thinking, "How can they torture this poor girl?" as this jury obviously did. This is the only jury I've heard of presenting the defendant with a jury photo as a memento.
--Lyddie
--Lyddie
-
Kat
- Posts: 14785
- Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2003 11:59 pm
- Real Name:
- Location: Central Florida
-
diana
- Posts: 878
- Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2004 1:21 pm
- Real Name:
Lizzie's swooning
So far I've only found where Lizzie was reported to have swooned at the end of Moody's opening statement. Under the heading "LIZZIE FAINTS AWAY" The New Bedford Evening Standard (June 6, 1893:4) reported:
"Immediately after Mr. Moody had finished the opening of the case, the prisoner swooned, and for several minutes was in an unconscious state."
The newspapers seem to say, not that Lizzie fainted, but that she left the room when the skulls were brought in.
On June 14, Joe Howard of the Boston Globe claimed that Robinson had prevailed on Knowlton and that Lizzie would be allowed to leave the courtroom if the skulls of the Borden's were produced as evidence.
And the following appeared in the New Bedford Evening Standard (June 15, 1893) and was attributed to the New York Tribune :
"Throughout the morning session, while the doctors with their plaster casts, marked in red to show where the wounds had been made in the faces, heads and necks of Mr. and Mrs. Borden, were testifying, she [Lizzie] sat with red eyes and trembling lips and with deep marks in her pale face, looking as long as she could, listening as much as she could, and finally retreating in grief and tears behind her fan. Finally, at the afternoon session, when the skulls of her murdered father and stepmother were brought into the room, the court conferred a moment, and then the chief justice said in a quiet, kindly voice that the prisoner would be allowed to remain in the custody of the sheriff in another part of the building while this portion of the examination proceeded."
But there is no indication in the trial transcript that this actually happened. Dr. Draper is asked:
"Q. Is there anything in the character or nature of the wounds upon the head of Mrs. Borden that assist you in determining the size of the instrument or of the cutting edge of the instrument used to inflict the wounds?
A. No, sir.
Q. Is there anything in the nature or character of the wounds upon the head of Mr. Borden which would so assist you?
A. There is.
Q. Would the skull itself be of assistance in pointing out such things as occur to you to be important?
A. It would.
MR. KNOWLTON. Then in that case, although I regret very much the necessity of doing it, I shall have to ask Dr. Dolan to produce it.
(Dr. Dolan retired from the Court room and returned with the skull of Mr. Borden.)" (Trial, 1046-47)
Wouldn't you think that if the fact that Dr. Dolan left and returned to the courtroom was recorded -- that the fact that the prisoner left would also be recorded?
"Immediately after Mr. Moody had finished the opening of the case, the prisoner swooned, and for several minutes was in an unconscious state."
The newspapers seem to say, not that Lizzie fainted, but that she left the room when the skulls were brought in.
On June 14, Joe Howard of the Boston Globe claimed that Robinson had prevailed on Knowlton and that Lizzie would be allowed to leave the courtroom if the skulls of the Borden's were produced as evidence.
And the following appeared in the New Bedford Evening Standard (June 15, 1893) and was attributed to the New York Tribune :
"Throughout the morning session, while the doctors with their plaster casts, marked in red to show where the wounds had been made in the faces, heads and necks of Mr. and Mrs. Borden, were testifying, she [Lizzie] sat with red eyes and trembling lips and with deep marks in her pale face, looking as long as she could, listening as much as she could, and finally retreating in grief and tears behind her fan. Finally, at the afternoon session, when the skulls of her murdered father and stepmother were brought into the room, the court conferred a moment, and then the chief justice said in a quiet, kindly voice that the prisoner would be allowed to remain in the custody of the sheriff in another part of the building while this portion of the examination proceeded."
But there is no indication in the trial transcript that this actually happened. Dr. Draper is asked:
"Q. Is there anything in the character or nature of the wounds upon the head of Mrs. Borden that assist you in determining the size of the instrument or of the cutting edge of the instrument used to inflict the wounds?
A. No, sir.
Q. Is there anything in the nature or character of the wounds upon the head of Mr. Borden which would so assist you?
A. There is.
Q. Would the skull itself be of assistance in pointing out such things as occur to you to be important?
A. It would.
MR. KNOWLTON. Then in that case, although I regret very much the necessity of doing it, I shall have to ask Dr. Dolan to produce it.
(Dr. Dolan retired from the Court room and returned with the skull of Mr. Borden.)" (Trial, 1046-47)
Wouldn't you think that if the fact that Dr. Dolan left and returned to the courtroom was recorded -- that the fact that the prisoner left would also be recorded?
-
Kat
- Posts: 14785
- Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2003 11:59 pm
- Real Name:
- Location: Central Florida
-
lydiapinkham
- Posts: 428
- Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2004 3:01 pm
- Real Name:
- Location: new england
Kat, there is a swooning Lizzie engraving (p. 220) in the Sourcebook and a story from the Boston Globe on p. 214. (This same article refers to Lizzie's "glossy black" hair.) Their account has Lizzie swoon at a spirited and graphic account of the crimes. The story I want to track down is the one that claims she fainted when someone dropped Papa's skull during a demo. I'll keep looking.
--Lyddie
--Lyddie
-
lydiapinkham
- Posts: 428
- Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2004 3:01 pm
- Real Name:
- Location: new england
Diana, I finally tracked down the date of the swoon described by the Globe, and it coincides with your June 6 date in the New Bedford paper. The interesting thing is that we find various interpretations of that date (depending upon each reporter's vantage point and sympathies?). The story on 214 (not dated, but immediately following he New York Times account of the same event) says that Lizzie shielded her face with her Japanese fan during the more sensational descriptions, then was found to be unconscious. Some seem to believe her to have fainted, others to have fallen asleep.
On page 261, the Boston Herald describes the bloody sofa, with blood stained carpet and other items "that might have been borrowed from a bowery chamber of horrors" (260) waiting outside the courttroom. So I gather that the sofa made it as far as the hallway. Think I'll take a break to see what other thrills await!
--Lyddie
On page 261, the Boston Herald describes the bloody sofa, with blood stained carpet and other items "that might have been borrowed from a bowery chamber of horrors" (260) waiting outside the courttroom. So I gather that the sofa made it as far as the hallway. Think I'll take a break to see what other thrills await!
--Lyddie
-
lydiapinkham
- Posts: 428
- Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2004 3:01 pm
- Real Name:
- Location: new england
Kat, I think the closest verification we have for fainting is in several news accounts of June 6 of the trial. We find tears later on, but no more swoons. The papers variously describe her as having anything from momentary dizziness to dramatic change of color and apparent illness. One thing I finally figured out in the Sourcebook (that everyone else probably knows) is that articles signed "Howard" and given no paper affiliation are articles by Joseph Howard for the New Bedford Standard. I guess because these represent the largest number of selections, or because he assumed everyone knew whose reporter Howard was, Kent didn't think it necessary to label those articles.
Also, as to the timing of the swoon, it seems to have followed the conclusion of the prosecution's opening remarks, which contained mention of the ultimate punishment. The skulls were brought in that day, but apparently not openly displayed. I've got to track down that dropped skull; it's driving me nuts!
--Lyddie
Also, as to the timing of the swoon, it seems to have followed the conclusion of the prosecution's opening remarks, which contained mention of the ultimate punishment. The skulls were brought in that day, but apparently not openly displayed. I've got to track down that dropped skull; it's driving me nuts!
--Lyddie
-
Kat
- Posts: 14785
- Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2003 11:59 pm
- Real Name:
- Location: Central Florida
Thanks, Lyddie!
I pulled that fainting Lizzie picture and painted it for The Hatchet- I am real familiar with that picture! I think the lady is swooning because her corset is too tight!
It certainly is dramatic.
I have been satisfied of the faint at the close of the session.
I recall the story of the dress skirt covering the skull or cast of the skull and when that was accidently brushed aside on the table, Lizzie caught sight of the thing and fainted.
I don't recall anyone dropping it or anyone writing about dropping it?
I pulled that fainting Lizzie picture and painted it for The Hatchet- I am real familiar with that picture! I think the lady is swooning because her corset is too tight!
It certainly is dramatic.
I have been satisfied of the faint at the close of the session.
I recall the story of the dress skirt covering the skull or cast of the skull and when that was accidently brushed aside on the table, Lizzie caught sight of the thing and fainted.
I don't recall anyone dropping it or anyone writing about dropping it?
-
diana
- Posts: 878
- Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2004 1:21 pm
- Real Name:
Lizzie swoons -- or does she?
I had no luck finding the dropped skull, Lyddie. But here’s a few authors' takes on the skulls and Lizzie's swooning.
Spiering and Sullivan: she fainted during Moody’s address because “At one stage of his opening, Moody, holding a dress that was to be offered into evidence, tossed it carelessly upon the prosecution table. Lying on the table was a plain, opened handbag with tissue paper covering its contents. As the dress landed partially upon the bag the tissue was swept away, and there were exposed in plain view the hideous eyeless, fleshless skulls of the two victims.
Lizzie Borden at first covered her eyes with her fan, then her head fell against the police matron seated next to her, and she slid to the floor in a dead faint.” (quote: Sullivan,76 - similar wording in Spiering, 117)
Radin (145): she fainted during Draper’s testimony when the skulls were produced.
Pearson (26): she fainted twice; once during Moody’s opening address and again when the skulls were produced.
Kent in 40 Whacks (133): “A horrified Lizzie was mercifully allowed to sit in the hallway” while Andrew’s skull was exhibited.
Hixson (46): she was allowed to be excused from the courtroom.
Victoria Lincoln (31): “It is a favorite legend that Lizzie was unexpectedly confronted in the court with her parent’s skulls and swooned.
So pick your favorite scenario. Did Lizzie see the skulls during Moody’s opening and faint in horror? Did she faint after Moody’s description of them during his opening statement -- or not until Dolan actually brought in Andrew’s skull during Draper’s testimony? Or did she faint during Moody’s opening AND when Andrew’s skull was brought in. Or did the lawyers agree that she could be excused and wait in the hallway/anteroom? Or, as Lincoln suggests, is it all the stuff of legend?
Spiering and Sullivan: she fainted during Moody’s address because “At one stage of his opening, Moody, holding a dress that was to be offered into evidence, tossed it carelessly upon the prosecution table. Lying on the table was a plain, opened handbag with tissue paper covering its contents. As the dress landed partially upon the bag the tissue was swept away, and there were exposed in plain view the hideous eyeless, fleshless skulls of the two victims.
Lizzie Borden at first covered her eyes with her fan, then her head fell against the police matron seated next to her, and she slid to the floor in a dead faint.” (quote: Sullivan,76 - similar wording in Spiering, 117)
Radin (145): she fainted during Draper’s testimony when the skulls were produced.
Pearson (26): she fainted twice; once during Moody’s opening address and again when the skulls were produced.
Kent in 40 Whacks (133): “A horrified Lizzie was mercifully allowed to sit in the hallway” while Andrew’s skull was exhibited.
Hixson (46): she was allowed to be excused from the courtroom.
Victoria Lincoln (31): “It is a favorite legend that Lizzie was unexpectedly confronted in the court with her parent’s skulls and swooned.
So pick your favorite scenario. Did Lizzie see the skulls during Moody’s opening and faint in horror? Did she faint after Moody’s description of them during his opening statement -- or not until Dolan actually brought in Andrew’s skull during Draper’s testimony? Or did she faint during Moody’s opening AND when Andrew’s skull was brought in. Or did the lawyers agree that she could be excused and wait in the hallway/anteroom? Or, as Lincoln suggests, is it all the stuff of legend?
-
Harry
- Posts: 4061
- Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2003 4:28 pm
- Real Name: harry
- Location: South Carolina
Re Lizzie fainting. This is also from Kent, p143:
"After her fainting spell on opening day, occasioned by the graphic descriptions of the wounds on the heads of the victims, she had, on two other occasions, become faint and had to be led from the courtroom; once at the display of Andrew's skull and once from the oppressive heat."
It does not say she actually fainted on either occasion.
Also in Kent, p98, referring to her fainting spell after Moody's opening:
"Headlines in all the papers next day screamed of her fainting, but, since such a public display of distress and emotion did not jibe with the carefully crafted image of Lizzie, Edwin Porter does not mention it in his history of the Borden murders."
I really don't believe she fainted a second time. If she had the newspapers would have headlined her faint again. This is the kind of stuff they lived for. Witness the dramatic drawing posted by Kat.
They reported that Mrs. Bowen fainted and also the juror Hodges. Certainly, if Lizzie had it would have been a banner day for the papers.
"After her fainting spell on opening day, occasioned by the graphic descriptions of the wounds on the heads of the victims, she had, on two other occasions, become faint and had to be led from the courtroom; once at the display of Andrew's skull and once from the oppressive heat."
It does not say she actually fainted on either occasion.
Also in Kent, p98, referring to her fainting spell after Moody's opening:
"Headlines in all the papers next day screamed of her fainting, but, since such a public display of distress and emotion did not jibe with the carefully crafted image of Lizzie, Edwin Porter does not mention it in his history of the Borden murders."
I really don't believe she fainted a second time. If she had the newspapers would have headlined her faint again. This is the kind of stuff they lived for. Witness the dramatic drawing posted by Kat.
They reported that Mrs. Bowen fainted and also the juror Hodges. Certainly, if Lizzie had it would have been a banner day for the papers.
-
lydiapinkham
- Posts: 428
- Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2004 3:01 pm
- Real Name:
- Location: new england
-
lydiapinkham
- Posts: 428
- Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2004 3:01 pm
- Real Name:
- Location: new england
I found a mention of a second fainting spell in Rebello, 253. It's quoted, I believe from the Boston Post:
" '. . . she acted like any other woman in distress by actually fainting when the news of the acquittal reached her ears.' "
Interestingly, no other papers mention this fainting spell, although they have her in tears, with head lowered. The above account might be the second swoon we've been looking for.
Still can't trace the dropped skull, but I know I read it somewhere--Pearson? Porter? I'll let you guys know if I find it. I begin to think it is an apocryphal story that circulated by word of mouth, then made its way into the folklore.
--Lyddie
" '. . . she acted like any other woman in distress by actually fainting when the news of the acquittal reached her ears.' "
Interestingly, no other papers mention this fainting spell, although they have her in tears, with head lowered. The above account might be the second swoon we've been looking for.
Still can't trace the dropped skull, but I know I read it somewhere--Pearson? Porter? I'll let you guys know if I find it. I begin to think it is an apocryphal story that circulated by word of mouth, then made its way into the folklore.
--Lyddie
-
Harry
- Posts: 4061
- Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2003 4:28 pm
- Real Name: harry
- Location: South Carolina
The Evening Standard (June 21) had this to say about Lizzie's reaction to the verdict:
"On the announcement of the verdict her iron composure again failed her, and she bowed her head on the rail of the dock, and burst into a very passion of tears. Her friends, including her faithful sister, Emma, gathered around her and counseled her so that she became after a minute or two more composed. "
The Rochester, NY paper The Democrat & Chronicle of the same date, was far more dramatic:
"At the words the wretched woman fell quicker than ever an ox fell in the stock yards of Chicago. Her forehead crashed against the heavy walnut rail of the dock so as to shake the reporter of the Sun, who sat next to her, twelve feet away, leaning on the rail. It seemed that she must be stunned, but she was not. Quickly, with an unconscious movement, she flung up both arms and threw them over the rail and pressed them under her face so that it rested on them. "
The New York Times had this on her reaction:
"Then came the verdict and she sank to her chair, covered her face in her hands, and wept such tears as she had not shed for months."
The Manitoba Morning Free Press:
"Miss Borden's head went down upon the rail in front of her and tears came where they had refused to come for many a long day as she heard the sweetest words ever poured into her willing ears -- the words "not guilty."
And from the Boston Globe:
"Lizzie sank into a chair, rested her hands upon the rail, her face upon them, and cried her second cry of joy.
She was no longer friendless. Her sister, her counsel, the women in the courtroom, all the men from everywhere rushed to greet her, and burying her head in her sister's arms, she said:
"Now take me home, I want to go to the old place and go at once tonight."
That last line is a classic. Academy award scene.
"On the announcement of the verdict her iron composure again failed her, and she bowed her head on the rail of the dock, and burst into a very passion of tears. Her friends, including her faithful sister, Emma, gathered around her and counseled her so that she became after a minute or two more composed. "
The Rochester, NY paper The Democrat & Chronicle of the same date, was far more dramatic:
"At the words the wretched woman fell quicker than ever an ox fell in the stock yards of Chicago. Her forehead crashed against the heavy walnut rail of the dock so as to shake the reporter of the Sun, who sat next to her, twelve feet away, leaning on the rail. It seemed that she must be stunned, but she was not. Quickly, with an unconscious movement, she flung up both arms and threw them over the rail and pressed them under her face so that it rested on them. "
The New York Times had this on her reaction:
"Then came the verdict and she sank to her chair, covered her face in her hands, and wept such tears as she had not shed for months."
The Manitoba Morning Free Press:
"Miss Borden's head went down upon the rail in front of her and tears came where they had refused to come for many a long day as she heard the sweetest words ever poured into her willing ears -- the words "not guilty."
And from the Boston Globe:
"Lizzie sank into a chair, rested her hands upon the rail, her face upon them, and cried her second cry of joy.
She was no longer friendless. Her sister, her counsel, the women in the courtroom, all the men from everywhere rushed to greet her, and burying her head in her sister's arms, she said:
"Now take me home, I want to go to the old place and go at once tonight."
That last line is a classic. Academy award scene.
-
lydiapinkham
- Posts: 428
- Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2004 3:01 pm
- Real Name:
- Location: new england
I've got to go with the ox in the Chicago stockyards analogy as my favorite, Har! The papers ran the gamut from pathos to bathos, didn't they? 
Well, I think I've exhausted all my sources looking for the dropped skull. I greatly fear that my memory has embellished the original, which seems to be best explained in Robert Sullivan, Goodbye Lizzie Borden p. 76:
"At one stage of his opening, Moody, holding a dress that was to be offered into evidence, tossed it carelessly upon the prosecution table. Lying on the table was a plain, unopened handbag with tissue paper covering its contents. As the dress landed partially upon the bag the tissue was swept away, and there were exposed in plain view the hideous eyeless, fleshless skulls of the two victims."
According to Sullivan, this revelation is the cause of the great faint we've been discussing. Sullivan goes on to quote Howard's attractive description (not much more flattering than the stockyard metaphor) that describes "her face red with congestive symptoms, an inert, consciousless mass of inanimate flesh." EEEEWWWWWW!
I think what stuck with me about that scene is the cavalier carelessness with which Moody treats the bag--no more reverence than to turn it into a valet. Somehow I think my brain transformed that fumble into a greater one that actually knocked the skull to the floor. Sorry if I misled anybody.
--Lyddie
Well, I think I've exhausted all my sources looking for the dropped skull. I greatly fear that my memory has embellished the original, which seems to be best explained in Robert Sullivan, Goodbye Lizzie Borden p. 76:
"At one stage of his opening, Moody, holding a dress that was to be offered into evidence, tossed it carelessly upon the prosecution table. Lying on the table was a plain, unopened handbag with tissue paper covering its contents. As the dress landed partially upon the bag the tissue was swept away, and there were exposed in plain view the hideous eyeless, fleshless skulls of the two victims."
According to Sullivan, this revelation is the cause of the great faint we've been discussing. Sullivan goes on to quote Howard's attractive description (not much more flattering than the stockyard metaphor) that describes "her face red with congestive symptoms, an inert, consciousless mass of inanimate flesh." EEEEWWWWWW!
I think what stuck with me about that scene is the cavalier carelessness with which Moody treats the bag--no more reverence than to turn it into a valet. Somehow I think my brain transformed that fumble into a greater one that actually knocked the skull to the floor. Sorry if I misled anybody.
--Lyddie
-
Kat
- Posts: 14785
- Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2003 11:59 pm
- Real Name:
- Location: Central Florida
This whole later topic about the faint of Lizzie is very informational (did I coin a word, or just misuse one?).
Lyddie you brought your *dropped skull* to the right place and worked it out. That is exemplary.
(And if you ever do find it you know we'll be interested! )
Too bad the *Lizzie faints* didn't get straighted out so easily in the 20th century by a group of people who care- so as not to pass into myth.
It's a shame this kind of working together wasn't available to past authors.
I wonder if V. Lincoln would have used us?
Lyddie you brought your *dropped skull* to the right place and worked it out. That is exemplary.
(And if you ever do find it you know we'll be interested!
)Too bad the *Lizzie faints* didn't get straighted out so easily in the 20th century by a group of people who care- so as not to pass into myth.
It's a shame this kind of working together wasn't available to past authors.
I wonder if V. Lincoln would have used us?
-
Harry
- Posts: 4061
- Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2003 4:28 pm
- Real Name: harry
- Location: South Carolina
I did a quick check and found that at least four newspapers, (the Boston Globe, the Boston Herald, the Evening Standard and the NY Times) all say Lizzie was allowed to leave the court room before Andrew's skull was exhibited. The skull had been brought in while she was still there but not yet shown.
Sullivan. p130, has this dramatic passage:
"The prosecutor turned, stepped to the prosecution table, took a large package from the floor and placed it upon the table. There was then a shuffling of papers, and then occurred one of the most sensational moments of the trial. As the prosecutor walked again toward the witness stand, he held in his hand the actual fleshless, crushed skull of Andrew J. Borden. This gruesome relic shocked spectators, Court, and jury alike. Passing the ghastly object to the witness, Dr. Draper ...."
And Kent's description, p140+, quoting Joe Howard, is graphic:
"Not satisfied with the plaster casts, Knowlton apologized to the court but insisted that the skull itself be brought in for the witness to use. Columnist Joe Howard described the macabre scene:
It was Mr. Borden's skull. It was done up in a white handkerchief and looked like a bouquet such as a man carries to his sweetheart. A pile of law books was arranged high on the table in front of jury and made a stand for the skull to rest upon. The professor uncovered the skull and put it on this heap of learning, but the jaw came separately in his hand. When the doctor put it in its place by lifting the rest of the skull, he moved the two parts so that the mouth opened and shut like the silent jaws of a ghost. To see that jaw wag made the spectators wonder what it would say if it could talk."
Then last but not least, there is Spiering's account. (p144):
"There was an uneasy pause as Prosecutor Moody took a large package, wrapped in brown paper, from the floor and placed it on the prosecution table. The paper rustled as he tore it open. Suddenly he walked toward the witness holding in his hand the actual fleshless, decapitated head of Andrew Borden.
The shock was staggering. Women shrieked, covering their eyes, and members of the jury gasped. Reporters peeked past the starched collars of their colleagues to notice that someone else had fainted.
It was Lizzie.
She was carried from the courtroom as Dr. Draper began inserting the edge of the hatchet into the wounds of the eyeless relic."
Some of these "facts" are not listed anywhere else. I do not put much, if any, faith in Spiering's book.
Lyddie, I seem to remember something falling to the floor as well but I believe some one said it was the covering over the skull which accidently came off revealing it. If it was one of the authors I think we may chalk it up to dramatic license. From what I just posted the skull appeared to be securely wrapped in paper when brought into the court room.
Sullivan. p130, has this dramatic passage:
"The prosecutor turned, stepped to the prosecution table, took a large package from the floor and placed it upon the table. There was then a shuffling of papers, and then occurred one of the most sensational moments of the trial. As the prosecutor walked again toward the witness stand, he held in his hand the actual fleshless, crushed skull of Andrew J. Borden. This gruesome relic shocked spectators, Court, and jury alike. Passing the ghastly object to the witness, Dr. Draper ...."
And Kent's description, p140+, quoting Joe Howard, is graphic:
"Not satisfied with the plaster casts, Knowlton apologized to the court but insisted that the skull itself be brought in for the witness to use. Columnist Joe Howard described the macabre scene:
It was Mr. Borden's skull. It was done up in a white handkerchief and looked like a bouquet such as a man carries to his sweetheart. A pile of law books was arranged high on the table in front of jury and made a stand for the skull to rest upon. The professor uncovered the skull and put it on this heap of learning, but the jaw came separately in his hand. When the doctor put it in its place by lifting the rest of the skull, he moved the two parts so that the mouth opened and shut like the silent jaws of a ghost. To see that jaw wag made the spectators wonder what it would say if it could talk."
Then last but not least, there is Spiering's account. (p144):
"There was an uneasy pause as Prosecutor Moody took a large package, wrapped in brown paper, from the floor and placed it on the prosecution table. The paper rustled as he tore it open. Suddenly he walked toward the witness holding in his hand the actual fleshless, decapitated head of Andrew Borden.
The shock was staggering. Women shrieked, covering their eyes, and members of the jury gasped. Reporters peeked past the starched collars of their colleagues to notice that someone else had fainted.
It was Lizzie.
She was carried from the courtroom as Dr. Draper began inserting the edge of the hatchet into the wounds of the eyeless relic."
Some of these "facts" are not listed anywhere else. I do not put much, if any, faith in Spiering's book.
Lyddie, I seem to remember something falling to the floor as well but I believe some one said it was the covering over the skull which accidently came off revealing it. If it was one of the authors I think we may chalk it up to dramatic license. From what I just posted the skull appeared to be securely wrapped in paper when brought into the court room.
-
lydiapinkham
- Posts: 428
- Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2004 3:01 pm
- Real Name:
- Location: new england
Thank you, Kat! Harry, I'm glad I'm not the only one who has that impression of a dropped piece of evidence, but I think it is the tossed dress and inadvertant premature display of the skull we are remembering.
Old Howard did have a way with words, didn't he? That macabre bouquet is priceless! I also love the Edgar Bergen routine with the jawbone!
--Lyddie
Old Howard did have a way with words, didn't he? That macabre bouquet is priceless! I also love the Edgar Bergen routine with the jawbone!
--Lyddie
-
Susan
- Posts: 2361
- Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2004 10:26 pm
- Real Name:
- Location: California
I just found this one about Lizzie's fainting spell in the New York Times, don't know if you covered this one yet?
The New York Times
LIZZIE BORDEN IN A FAINT
OVERCOME BY THE. PROSECUTION'S STORY OF THE MURDER.
Second Day of the Great Trial at New-Bedford-
The State Open's It, Case and Examines One Witness-Great Crowds About the Court House-
Jury Goes to Fall River and Takes a Careful View of the Borden House and Its Surroundings.
NEW-BEDFORD, Mass., June 6.-The trial of Lizzie Borden for the murder of her father and stepmother was continued to-day. A few spectators were admitted into the court chamber, but hundreds sought admission in vain. Today, as yesterday, when the trial opened, great crowds surrounded the Court House and gazed at the brick wall of the building, as though by so doing they might gain some slight information of the celebrated trial in progress within. There were no empty seats in the courtroom, though there was by no means a crowd.
The majority of the spectators were men, but a score or more of women were in attendance. After the reading of the indictment the outline of the Government's case was given by District Attorney William H. Moody, a young man with an earnest and impressive air.
The prisoner sat behind the Deputy Sheriff and listened to Mr. Moody's careful address with the closest attention, as calm and unmoved as ever. Her eyes looked straight toward the speaker. Indeed, the spectators seemed as much interested in the prosecutor's words as did Miss Borden, and but for the uniformed Sheriff sitting beside her she might have been taken by a stranger for one of those who had come to the courtroom with no greater interest than that of curiosity.
It was a great surprise, therefore, to everybody when just as Mr. Moody finished speaking Miss Borden fell back in her chair in a faint.
Mr. Moody's exposition of the circumstances attending the murder of the Bordens was clear and succinct, and he evidently left a favorable impression on the minds of the jury.
In reference to the cause of the murder, Mr. Moody said: "There was or came to be between prisoner and stepmother an unkindly feeling. From the nature of the case it will be impossible for us to get anything more than suggestive glimpses of this feeling from outsiders. The daughters thought that something should be done for them by way of dividing the property after they had learned that the stepmother had been amply provided for. Then came a division and ill-feeling, and the title of "mother" was dropped.
The prosecution would show, Mr. Moody said, that when a dressmaker of the family had spoken of the stepmother as "mother", Lizzie had chided her and said: "Don't call her mother; we hate her; she's a mean spiteful thing."
"When," said Mr. Moody, "an officer was seeking information from the prisoner, right in sight of the woman who had sunken under the assassin's blows, and asked, "When did you last see your mother?" the reply came from Lizzie: " 'She isn't my mother; my mother died when I was an infant.' "
It would be shown, continued Mr. Moody, that there was an impassable barrier built up between the daughters and the stepmother, socially and by locks and bars.
For two hours the attorney spoke, calling attention to the constant presence of the prisoner in the house that morning, of her careless and indifferent demeanor after the crime, and of the various incriminating incidents which marked her conduct.
Then calmly and deliberately he delivered his peroration: "The time for hasty and inexact reasoning is past. We are to be guided from this time forth by the law and the evidence only. I adjure you gentlemen to keep your minds in the same open attitude which you have maintained to-day to the end. When that end comes, after you have heard the evidence on both sides, the arguments of the counsel and the instruction of the court, God forbid that you should step one step against the law or beyond the evidence. But if your minds, considering all these circumstances, are irresistibly brought to the conclusion of the guilt of the prisoner, we ask you in your verdict to declare her guilty. By so doing, shall you make true deliverance of the great issue which has been submitted to you. "
As the District Attorney ceased speaking the prisoner, who, with her face covered by the fan, had sat motionless for the last hour, suddenly succumbed to the strain that had been put upon her nervous system and lost consciousness. The Rev. Mr. Jubb, sitting directly in front of her and separated only by the dock rail, turned to her assistance, and Mr. Jennings, the attorney, hurried to the place from his position. Smelling salts and water were brought into immediate requisition, and soon entire consciousness returned.
The New York Times
LIZZIE BORDEN IN A FAINT
OVERCOME BY THE. PROSECUTION'S STORY OF THE MURDER.
Second Day of the Great Trial at New-Bedford-
The State Open's It, Case and Examines One Witness-Great Crowds About the Court House-
Jury Goes to Fall River and Takes a Careful View of the Borden House and Its Surroundings.
NEW-BEDFORD, Mass., June 6.-The trial of Lizzie Borden for the murder of her father and stepmother was continued to-day. A few spectators were admitted into the court chamber, but hundreds sought admission in vain. Today, as yesterday, when the trial opened, great crowds surrounded the Court House and gazed at the brick wall of the building, as though by so doing they might gain some slight information of the celebrated trial in progress within. There were no empty seats in the courtroom, though there was by no means a crowd.
The majority of the spectators were men, but a score or more of women were in attendance. After the reading of the indictment the outline of the Government's case was given by District Attorney William H. Moody, a young man with an earnest and impressive air.
The prisoner sat behind the Deputy Sheriff and listened to Mr. Moody's careful address with the closest attention, as calm and unmoved as ever. Her eyes looked straight toward the speaker. Indeed, the spectators seemed as much interested in the prosecutor's words as did Miss Borden, and but for the uniformed Sheriff sitting beside her she might have been taken by a stranger for one of those who had come to the courtroom with no greater interest than that of curiosity.
It was a great surprise, therefore, to everybody when just as Mr. Moody finished speaking Miss Borden fell back in her chair in a faint.
Mr. Moody's exposition of the circumstances attending the murder of the Bordens was clear and succinct, and he evidently left a favorable impression on the minds of the jury.
In reference to the cause of the murder, Mr. Moody said: "There was or came to be between prisoner and stepmother an unkindly feeling. From the nature of the case it will be impossible for us to get anything more than suggestive glimpses of this feeling from outsiders. The daughters thought that something should be done for them by way of dividing the property after they had learned that the stepmother had been amply provided for. Then came a division and ill-feeling, and the title of "mother" was dropped.
The prosecution would show, Mr. Moody said, that when a dressmaker of the family had spoken of the stepmother as "mother", Lizzie had chided her and said: "Don't call her mother; we hate her; she's a mean spiteful thing."
"When," said Mr. Moody, "an officer was seeking information from the prisoner, right in sight of the woman who had sunken under the assassin's blows, and asked, "When did you last see your mother?" the reply came from Lizzie: " 'She isn't my mother; my mother died when I was an infant.' "
It would be shown, continued Mr. Moody, that there was an impassable barrier built up between the daughters and the stepmother, socially and by locks and bars.
For two hours the attorney spoke, calling attention to the constant presence of the prisoner in the house that morning, of her careless and indifferent demeanor after the crime, and of the various incriminating incidents which marked her conduct.
Then calmly and deliberately he delivered his peroration: "The time for hasty and inexact reasoning is past. We are to be guided from this time forth by the law and the evidence only. I adjure you gentlemen to keep your minds in the same open attitude which you have maintained to-day to the end. When that end comes, after you have heard the evidence on both sides, the arguments of the counsel and the instruction of the court, God forbid that you should step one step against the law or beyond the evidence. But if your minds, considering all these circumstances, are irresistibly brought to the conclusion of the guilt of the prisoner, we ask you in your verdict to declare her guilty. By so doing, shall you make true deliverance of the great issue which has been submitted to you. "
As the District Attorney ceased speaking the prisoner, who, with her face covered by the fan, had sat motionless for the last hour, suddenly succumbed to the strain that had been put upon her nervous system and lost consciousness. The Rev. Mr. Jubb, sitting directly in front of her and separated only by the dock rail, turned to her assistance, and Mr. Jennings, the attorney, hurried to the place from his position. Smelling salts and water were brought into immediate requisition, and soon entire consciousness returned.
-
Susan
- Posts: 2361
- Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2004 10:26 pm
- Real Name:
- Location: California
I found this also where it sounds as though Hannah Reagan fainted!
The Boston Globe
June 14, 1893
EVEN SO!
What if Lizzie Did Ask for Acid?
Defense Claims That Proves Nothing.
State Says It Shows Murderous Intent.
Admission of the Evidence In Hot Dispute.Matron Reagan on the Witness Stand.
Swears the Prisoner Scored Her Sister.
"You've Given Me Away" Episode in Testimony.Bridget Sullivan and Dr Dolan Recalled.
When the witness, a drug clerk Eli Bense by name, began his testimony Miss Borden fairly glared at him leaned forward and stared him squarely in the eye. It was a new departure and possibly he may not have been prepared for it. However, that may be the clerk a good natured fellow blushed and stammered as he hurriedly replied, "I do." Before clerk Borden had finished the phraseology of the oath.
At this time there were two matters of interest before the court, Miss Borden's agitation and the collapse of the matron in an outside room Gov Robinson ca1med his client by a few reassuring remarks. The matron having left the stand staggered rather than walked through the adjacent room, where the bloodstained lounge stood, challenging attention into the next apartment where deputy sheriff Falvey gave her a glass of water, which she swallowed at a gulp and then sat upon a lounge in the retiring room where the treasurer of the Fall River bank for savings fanned her leaned over her and. comforted her with words of consolation.
The Boston Globe
June 14, 1893
EVEN SO!
What if Lizzie Did Ask for Acid?
Defense Claims That Proves Nothing.
State Says It Shows Murderous Intent.
Admission of the Evidence In Hot Dispute.Matron Reagan on the Witness Stand.
Swears the Prisoner Scored Her Sister.
"You've Given Me Away" Episode in Testimony.Bridget Sullivan and Dr Dolan Recalled.
When the witness, a drug clerk Eli Bense by name, began his testimony Miss Borden fairly glared at him leaned forward and stared him squarely in the eye. It was a new departure and possibly he may not have been prepared for it. However, that may be the clerk a good natured fellow blushed and stammered as he hurriedly replied, "I do." Before clerk Borden had finished the phraseology of the oath.
At this time there were two matters of interest before the court, Miss Borden's agitation and the collapse of the matron in an outside room Gov Robinson ca1med his client by a few reassuring remarks. The matron having left the stand staggered rather than walked through the adjacent room, where the bloodstained lounge stood, challenging attention into the next apartment where deputy sheriff Falvey gave her a glass of water, which she swallowed at a gulp and then sat upon a lounge in the retiring room where the treasurer of the Fall River bank for savings fanned her leaned over her and. comforted her with words of consolation.
-
Harry
- Posts: 4061
- Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2003 4:28 pm
- Real Name: harry
- Location: South Carolina
Pass the Johnny Cakes please.
Another showing of "Places to Die For" on the Food Channel, 8/11/2004 at 1:30pm Eastern time. This is a 30 minute show with a segment devoted to the B&B food.
If I remember correctly it was a decent show.
If I remember correctly it was a decent show.
-
Kat
- Posts: 14785
- Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2003 11:59 pm
- Real Name:
- Location: Central Florida
-
Susan
- Posts: 2361
- Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2004 10:26 pm
- Real Name:
- Location: California
No, I didn't type all of it, thankfully I was able to cut and paste! 
Yes, that was the first time I have ever read anything about the Matron fainting or about to faint also! Amazing that the trial went as smoothly as it did with all the fainting going on, didn't one of the jurors faint or feel faint and need to leave the courtroom?
Are you looking for something in particular in Moody's statement, or just refreshing your memory?
Yes, that was the first time I have ever read anything about the Matron fainting or about to faint also! Amazing that the trial went as smoothly as it did with all the fainting going on, didn't one of the jurors faint or feel faint and need to leave the courtroom?
Are you looking for something in particular in Moody's statement, or just refreshing your memory?-
Kat
- Posts: 14785
- Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2003 11:59 pm
- Real Name:
- Location: Central Florida
I am starting at the beginning and going all the way through- but taking notes.
Har says Mrs. Dr. Bowen became faint and a juror yes.
Trial
964
Q. Now, did you point out at that time a place upon the pocket which you said looked like blood?
A. I don't know that I said it---
(At this point Juror Hodges became faint, and the jury were allowed to retire to their room. After a short time the jury returned to the court room. The last question and unfinished answer were read by the stenographer.)
Q. Will you complete your answer?
A. Looked like blood.
--That was Louis B. Hodges, from Taunton, the 7th juror selected. (My notes)
Har says Mrs. Dr. Bowen became faint and a juror yes.
Trial
964
Q. Now, did you point out at that time a place upon the pocket which you said looked like blood?
A. I don't know that I said it---
(At this point Juror Hodges became faint, and the jury were allowed to retire to their room. After a short time the jury returned to the court room. The last question and unfinished answer were read by the stenographer.)
Q. Will you complete your answer?
A. Looked like blood.
--That was Louis B. Hodges, from Taunton, the 7th juror selected. (My notes)
-
Susan
- Posts: 2361
- Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2004 10:26 pm
- Real Name:
- Location: California
-
lydiapinkham
- Posts: 428
- Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2004 3:01 pm
- Real Name:
- Location: new england
I've seen football players turn pale and collapse at the sight of their own blood on donor days! The phobia can be pretty strong. The other thing is that the temperature in the courtroom seems to have been high and the air close. Women especially would have keeled over pretty easily with the added pressure of their corsets!
--Lyddie
--Lyddie