A newspaper clipping?

[Harry]

The book, The Commonwealth of Massachusetts vs Lizzie Borden: The Knowlton Papers, contains many letters which are not to be taken too seriously. But not all.

There is a lengthy one, HK341, which begins on page 356 and runs to 359. This letter, undated and unsigned, contains many of the same comments, facts and opinions expressed on this forum. Putting aside the horrendous spelling errors it is a fairly accurate presentation and sticks pretty close to what is generally accepted as happening. There are a few minor errors.

This part of the letter (bottom of page 358) was new information to me. Since the letter is unsigned it is difficult to verify:

"What do you suppose Mr Borden cut that slip from the newspaper for and preserved it so carefully in his pocket book. Dont it look as if he intended to coppy from it in the disposal of his property. and that Lizzie might knew he had preserved it and was afraid he might make practical use of it. I think he had preserved that peice of paper for a practical purpose that probably would not be as beneficial to Lizzie as she would like."

I checked Dr. Dolan's testimony at the trial (page 864+) and he does not mention a newspaper clipping:

"Q. Did you examine the pocket book?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you see what there was in the pocketbook?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What did you find in the pocketbook?
A. Found some money in bills and some in specie.
------------
Q. Did you find anything else in his pocketbook?
A. No, sir, not in his pocketbook.
Q. And the watch and chain were on his person in the usual place?
A. Yes, sir."

In the Preliminary, page 184, Dolan testifies:

"Q. Who gave you those?
A. The undertaker.
Q. What else?
A. I do not recollect anythingelse. I have a memorandum book.
Q. Have you got any papers?
A. I could not say; I have not examined it.
Q. You have not examined them?
A. I counted the money before the undertaker.
Q. Where are all these things?
A. In the safe at the office.
Q. Will you produce them?
A. Yes Sir."

When Dolan says he has a memorandum book I think he means his own and that since he is unsure of his answer he could refer to it. It's astonishing that at the time of the preliminary he still hadn't examined the contents (if any) of the pocket book other than the money.

The letter in Knowlton is fairly accurate and deviates only from known facts in this one instance. The letter also mentions that the size of the basket found in the barn containing the lead was much larger than the box Lizzie described and that it contained no lead.

It would be nice to know who wrote that letter.

[Harry]

Additional to my previous post:

I looked at Winward, the undertaker, in the Preliminary, page 386:

"Q. What pocket was that pocket book in?
A. In the inside pocket in the coat, I should think.
Q. In the coat pocket?
A. Yes Sir, inside pocket, inside the coat.
Q. Not inside the vest. What else in the shape of valuables?
A. In that pocket there was some minor papers, which we did not examine into, just opened them, and saw there was no more money in there, or notes. That is all we examined for."

[Susan]

I find it hard to believe also that none of the papers were checked, any one of them could have held a significant clue! I don't quite get what the anonymous letter is hinting at that was allegedly cut from the newspaper by Andrew and kept in his wallet. Was it an article on how to legally go about disinheriting your heirs?

[diana]

That is truly intriguing, Harry. Nice find!!

Darn, what were those "minor papers" unopened by the undertaker. His testimony makes it seem as though there could be something resembling a newspaper clipping in Andrew's pocket doesn't it?

[Bob Gutowski]

Well, if you're going to begin your investigation under the misapprehension that a roving maniac committed the crime, what use would anything in Borden's possession be?

This is fascinating stuff!

[Kat]

Thanks for the interesting post, Har!
I read that whole letter which is 3 pages and it sounds perculiarly like a summation written by a grand juror or whoever was giving them a closing statement!

"And now Mr. foreman and gentlemen after weighing the evi-
dence presented in this case and circumstances connected with it, I feel that we have now a sad duty to perform. And that there is but one thing more for us to do in the conclusion of that duty, and that is to find a Bill
against Lizzie A. Borden for the murder of her father, Andrew J. Borden, And step mother Abby Borden."

--It's not necessarily anonymous- it's just not signed.

Check the Hip-Bath collection in Proceedings, to see if some of Andrew's pocket contents are listed?

[Kat]

A. I do not recollect anything else. I have a memorandum book.
Q. Have you got any papers?
A. I could not say; I have not examined it.
Q. You have not examined them?

I think this example is probably open to another interpretation which is that "it" is the memorandum book found on Andrew's body. Then the papers are asked about, as "them."

The authorities seem more concerned that the money is all accounted for- at least Dolan is to the police.

I checked the Hip-bath Collection and Andrew's pocket contents are not listed tho a "hood" is mentioned and in association with Abby's body, a handkerchief and hair switch.

It sounds like a newspaper published an example of an estate inventory for anyone interested in planning their estate- or something similar. Maybe the laws were changing?
There was that information released (in the papers?) that Abby and Andrew were cataloguing his assets and it was in her handwriting. Is that an author?