Lizzie Borden Society Forum

Found this bit of information on a website mbhenty gave me called www.outwardfamily.com/victgorian servants and thought is was great. After reading the rules for being a victorian servant, I guess you were considered a bit of nobody if you were a servant, but anyway here goes the rules.

1) When being spoken to, stand still, keeping your hands quiet and always look at the person speaking.

2) Never let your voice be heard by the ladies and gentlemen of the household, unless you are spoken to directly a question or statement which requires a response, at which time, speak as little as possible.

3) In the presence of your mistress, never speak to another servant or person of your own rank, orto a child, unless only for necessity, and then as little as possible and as quietly as possible.

4) Never begin to talk to the ladies or gentlemen unless to deliver a message or to ask a necessary question, and then do it in a few words as possible.

5) Whenever possible, items that have been dropped, such as spectacles or handkerchiefs, and other small items, should be returned to the owner on a salver.

6) Always respond when you have recieved an order, and always use the proper address : "Sir",
Ma'Mam" "Miss" "Mrs" as the case may be.

7) Never offer your opinion to your employer.

8) Always "give room" that is, if you encounter one of your betters in the house, or on the stairs you are to make yourself as invisavble as possible, turning yourself toward the wall and averting our eyes.

9) Except in reply to a salutation offered never say "Good morning" or " Good Night" to your employer.

10) If you are required to walk with a lady or gentlemen in order to carry packages, or for any other reason, keep a few paces back.

11) YOu are required to be punctual to your place at mealtime.

12) YOu shall not recieve any realative, vistor, or friend into the house nor shall you introduce any person into the sevants hall without the consent of the butler or housekeeper.

13) Followers are strictly forbidden. Any female of the staff found fraternizing will be immediately dismissel.

14) Expect that any breakages or damages in the house will be deducted from your wages.


Thats a long list of stuff. Seems the dog in the house would have been treated better than the staff.

I love what you were able to come up with. This may help. In my study of things Victorian, I came across a book that was supposedly used a lot. You can view or download it free at Google books. It is called "The Book of Household Management" by Isabella Beeton published in 1861. It has a large section on the duties of different members of household staff. It is a little tough to get through being appox. 1000 pages, however, some of the stuff in there is quite amusing and it give you a good sense of how the day to day drab things were accomplished.

Mrs. Beeton's, as it is called, is a famous book. In this as in other things, however, we only get a picture of how certain people felt things should occur. Ask yourself how many people follow today's etiquette books.

Gee, I don't think Bridget did any of these.

#7 - Don't give your opinion to your employer.
Bridget: "'tis not fit for human consumption."
Andrew: "Waste not, want not. Serve it."
Bridget: "Yes, sirr!"

Well, she got the addressing the employer as 'sir' or 'madam' right...

When I look up Victorian stuff, I noticed real quick that there's a difference between English Victorian and American Victorian.

augusta wrote:When I look up Victorian stuff, I noticed real quick that there's a difference between English Victorian and American Victorian.

American "Victorian" was a pale copy of English Victorian, having as its basis neither the queen for whom it was named nor the many centuries of history that preceded it.

Well said, Lizbeth.

augusta wrote:Gee, I don't think Bridget did any of these.

#7 - Don't give your opinion to your employer.
Bridget: "'tis not fit for human consumption."
Andrew: "Waste not, want not. Serve it."
Bridget: "Yes, sirr!"

Well, she got the addressing the employer as 'sir' or 'madam' right...

When I look up Victorian stuff, I noticed real quick that there's a difference between English Victorian and American Victorian.

You're right. Guess she wasn't following that rule to the letter. But with a tight was like Andrew, I think you had be alittle out spoken.

snokkums wrote:You're right. Guess she wasn't following that rule to the letter. But with a tight was like Andrew, I think you had be alittle out spoken.

I'm not at all certain Andrew was a tightwad, and being outspoken to any degree as a servant was never a good thing. I very much doubt any servant who wanted to keep her job was sarcastic or disrespectful. Of course a lot can be communicated by facial expression and tone of voice.

I think there are a lot of indications that Andrew was a very frugal man who lived below his possible means, with very few conveniences or frills. So the other inmates of the home were forced to do so. First I look at the absence of hot running water in the house. There was one cold running water pump in the sink room, so all the water had to be heated. The absence of gas heating/lighting in the home. The fact that to save oil for the lamps they all sat in the dark at night when John Morse was visiting. The eating of leftovers day after day. He sold his horse and buggy, their only means for transportation, and walked even at his age. This doesn't seem like something someone that needs to go out of town as far as at least Swansea would think to do, unless it was in order to save the money in having to care for the horse. Everyone wonders why John Morse hired a rig when he came to town to go visiting. I wonder how else he was supposed to get that far. It would be the equivalent of renting a car today. The allowance of the girls and Abby. The fact that Abby complained about having to buy things for the home out of her allowance like curtains and such, and that the girls did not chip in for any of that. Andrew evidently didn't offer any extra cash for those things or Abby would not have complained about it. She could've just asked for money to buy curtains. Alice Russell stated in her testimony that "Everybody knew what Andrew Borden's idea's 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 would care for anything different."

Andrew had some strange ideas when it came to money. I don't think he deserves the sterotyped monikker of "Scrooge". But he certainly was tight in a lot of respects. Allen did a good job of listing them. That makes me cringe - him making Abby pay for stuff around the house out of her allowance. (Does anyone know what her allowance was?)

But then on other stuff, he was almost extravagent. Like buying Lizzie that sealskin coat. Those are so plush. And word has it that he sent Lizzie money in Europe.

But his business dealings were dealt with to the penny, even with his own sister after the death of their father, Abraham. There was a small amount having to do with something Lurana technically owed on something, and Andrew did make her pay for it.

I have always thought his money views were due to his being raised a Quaker, but I don't know now. He was certainly a no-frills kind of guy.

You know, I don't think Andrew could have fired Bridget. The 'girls' and Abby I don't think would have allowed it. For some reason they thought they needed a servant girl, and Abby certainly would have fought hard to keep Bridget. And 'the girls' would have probably been in a snit if Bridget were taken away. I don't think 'the girls' and Bridget were that close, but Bridget was better than no servant at all. I think it was just easier for Andrew to keep her on and avoid the hassle of the three women in the household jumping him.

If you read Bridget's trial testimonies, she is a pistol. The way she phrased things. She was asked about if she ate pears at the house, and she goes, "Well, I'm no great lover of them." She sometimes probably came out and said what she felt. Well, there's that "Pshaw!" when the door was locked.

I wonder if Andrew was prejudiced against Bridget because she was irish? Lizzie was not. She went on to have an Irish servant or more at Maplecroft.

Ha ha ha! Love how Allen calls the dwellers of the house of Borden "inmates". It's perfect.

Augusta, I'm with you on your take on Andrew. He was certainly a complex character, and I'm sure it cannot be accurate to characterize him as a tightwad. He certainly was a stickler for business, and while that might have irked some people, on the other hand people kept doing business with him, so he can't have been that bad. I see him as matter of fact, unemotional. And of course I could be wrong. Some men are shrewd businessmen and are very loving at home.

It is interesting to speculate on the type of man who would care so little about the comfort of the three women in his house that he wouldn't install a bathroom on one of the two upper floors, that he would not install inside lighting, and that he would get rid of the horse and carriage. (That last strikes me as utterly peculiar, and I'm sure we don't have the whole story there. Did Someone use the cart to go somewhere she should not have?) On the other hand, we have the generosities and even extravagances you mention. Clearly, we need more information in order to even begin to understand Andrew, or any of the players.

I have no reading on Bridget at all. I think all her reported comments have to be filtered through the social mores of the time, her class, and her Irishness. I don't see her comment in regard to pears as being sarcastic. I "hear" it as the response of an Irish maid trying to answer without giving a definite answer. It sounds like a very Irish type of answer to me, even as a present-day response. I also think she would have done anything to not be questioned, and was probably very much on her guard. If I'd been her I'd have been thinking about my future employment opportunities, and wondering whether this incident was going to color - or perhaps ruin - my entire life.

Of course, if you want to make money in business, I think you have be a bit frugal and a stickler for details. I think maybe that was the way andrew was. Waste not want not. You don't make money by wasting it. He probably watched every nickel and dime, right down to the penny.

A lot of women received "household allowances". It's possible that she received more than Lizzie and Emma because she had household expenses to take care of. As far as the bathrooms, electricity...those were new conveniences and while they were nice, Andrew probably didn't feel they were totally necessary since they had never had them before and made out just fine. It's just like today....if I had to go back to living in a 1950's style, dial telephone, tv with knob to change all 6 channels, no AC, no microwaves, no dishwashers, clothesline for wet laundry, etc...I'd make out just fine. However, the 20 and 30 somethings would scream bloody murder!! It was probably the same sort of situation back then. The maid was another thing. Even the middle class had at least ONE servant. Only the poor did without servants. Whether or not to have a maid was probably never even an issue with Andrew...again, like today...lets say with computers. The only people that probably DON'T have one are those that can't afford one...or the elderly who have no interest in the technology! If you tell people you don't have a computer, they look at you like you just grew a second head! Andrew might have been frugal, but only to a certain point!

I think that someone living without available conveniences that make life easier, even if it's just for the woman around him, shows that he was very into saving money. It puts me in the mind of people today trying to live "off the grid" in order to avoid paying for heating, water, etc. I still cannot see someone sitting in darkness at night to avoid paying a little extra for lamp oil, or electricity for that matter. Household allowances for women were indeed common, because it was unusual for married women to work outside the home at that time to make their own money. Teachers were forbidden to be married women. But I think making a woman pay for household items out of her own meager allowance, which one would think is supposed to be used for the things she needs for herself, shows how frugal he was. If you look at the Witness Statements on page 17, Abby's step mother Mrs. Jane Gray talks about Abby's allowance.

page 17.

Harrington. Visited Mrs. Jane Gray, Mrs. Borden's step mother. Her statement. "Things were not as pleasant at the Borden house as they might be. That is the reason I did not call on Mrs. Borden as often as I would have liked to. I told Mrs. Borden I would not change places with her for all her money. What I know about them is all hearsay. Mrs. Borden was a very close mouthed woman. She would bear a great deal, and say nothing. She told me she and the girls were allowed an equal monthly allowance, but they had more out of it than I for I had to furnish the table coverings, towelling, and other small things for the house out of mine.

page 18.

Sunday 21. Summoning witnesses, Bestcome A. Case and wife of 199 Second Street. Their statement. Understood from general talk the girls and Mrs. Borden did not get along very pleasantly. Never heard Mrs. Borden say anything about the family relations. Her allowance was about $200 a year, but much of it was spent on articles for the house. The lace curtains in the parlor she purchased. The girls got the same amount as she, but it was for their own use. A short time ago Mrs. Borden, for the first time, told me of he robbery, which took place about a year ago. She simply mentioned it, and said she would tell me about it some time.

So they DID get an equal amount! I wonder if Lizzie and Emma bought things for their rooms, etc....curtains, etc. It's funny, I remember my parents and grandmothers sitting in the dark instead of lighting a lamp in the evenings. Especially sitting on the front porch after dark...chatting. It seemed quite comfortable to me as a child.

Bet Abby held on to Bridget tooth and nail-- if she didn't have a servant, everything would have fallen on HER.

Know Lizzie and Emma kept up their rooms, but that appears, by all accounts, to have been a territorial, "don't cross this line in the sand" kind of thing.

In the various testimonies, word comes out of Abby keeping (storing) her things in the guest bedroom, but I wonder how much of those were household items, not specifically her personal articles.

Anyway, although Lizzie and Emma "received" co. in the guest room, there's Abby up there, the morning she was sliced and diced, making the bed. Guess the girls "called" Abby on having to keep up the room, as she stored stuff in there.

That is, "You keep your stuff in there, you clean it."

In spite of the fact that they employed it as a social area.

In testimony, either Emma or Lizzie (I think Emma) states that Mrs. Borden used the clothes press for a very few things, too. This I seriously doubt. I take it as a weak example of Emma trying to make it seem that they were a happy trio, "share and share alike," kissie-wissie.

Just as Emma testifies that she (and Lizzie) sometimes cleaned the front parlor. This, too, I seriously doubt. I don't think Emma and Lizzie ever lifted one finger to make Abby's life more pleasant.

Augusta, back to the allowance biz: I read in one of the Lizzie books that Abby, Lizzie, and Emma each received a weekly allowance of four dollars, which was the same as Bridget's pay. If true, it would have been fairly generous for the daughters, less so for Abby, who indeed had to use hers for household items.

Small wonder that Lizzie could afford a sealskin cape; whereas, Abby probably could not.

Anyway, the buying power would have been fifty dollars/week, more or less, for four dollars. There's no super-accurate way of determining that, because some items have increased exponentially in cost since then, while others have increased at a more reasonably staggered rate.

Also, what throws such a formula out of whack is, say, the price of gold. Think what a twenty-dollar gold piece from 1892 would be worth at $1,600/ounce!!!

So, the allowance was pretty fair, except for Abby, and especially for Lizzie and Emma, who apparently did much of nothing to help Abby, in spite of under-oath protestations to the contrary, when Lizzie's life was hanging in the balance.

I've thought about that trip abroad. It seems out of character, in my opinion, for him to have sent Lizzie on such a trip. I don't really see any evidence that he afforded any such extravagant gestures to other members of the household. I do understand that women back then were thought fragile not only of body, but of mind. Too much activity or exertion, even bicycle riding, was thought by some to be unhealthy for a woman. Even a furthering of education in colleges was looked upon by most as unnecessary, because women were taught their only real role was to be a wife and mother. They stayed at home while the man worked. They were not encouraged to learn a trade, unless it was one that was already considered "women's work." Sewing, cooking, domestic, etc. When they were educated it was generally in the arts, cooking, languages, and anything that was thought to make a woman more cultured. Not to further her education, or for anything thought to taxing on the mind. Anything and everything could be attributed as a cause for her to have fits, hysteria, or suffer some sort of break down. And a woman could be involuntarily hospitalized until it was thought she was well again if it was so deemed by a doctor or family member. They had a treatment called the rest cure, which is described if anyone has ever read the story "The Yellow Wallpaper". They also used the water cure, which was bathing in sulphur springs or hot springs, and traveling abroad on extended trips was thought to be healthy for a woman suffering from what we would consider depression. Could Lizzie have been sent on her trip for this reason?

I have always thought the trip abroad was odd. I wonder if there was some reason she had to be gotten out of the way. Also, I seem to remember reports of her travelling alone. That would be strange indeed, as women - especially unmarried women - simply did not travel that kind of distance unaccompanied.

Just some interesting reading on The Yellow Wallpaper, which I think gives an insight into how women were thought of at the time by the men in society. Gilman was suffering from what we would today call postpartum depression.

"For many years I suffered from a severe and continuous nervous breakdown tending to melancholia—and beyond. During about the third year of this trouble I went, in devout faith and some faint stir of hope, to a noted specialist in nervous diseases, the best known in the country. This wise man put me to bed and applied the rest cure, to which a still good physique responded so promptly that he concluded that there was nothing much the matter with me, and sent me home with solemn advice to 'live as domestic a life as possible,' to 'have but two hours' intelligent life a day,' and 'never to touch pen, brush or pencil again as long as I lived.' This was in 1887…"
—Charlotte Perkins Gilman, "Why I Wrote the Yellow Wall-paper," 1913 "

Yes, women often had to get a doctor's permission in order to rest. Not much different in many
parts of the world today. Every employer who requires a doctor's note in order to pay for sick time is doing the same condescending thing. As an adult I know when I need to take it easy, and I don't need a man to tell me when I can do that. Hmmph. What leads you to a diagnosis of postpartum depression in this case?

Yes, it simply wouldn't have been done for Lizzie to have gone on a Grand Tour by herself, but she was with a group of other young women from Fall River, fully chaperoned.

Now, if Lizzie had been on good terms with Abby, it would have been perfectly acceptable for them to have gone together.

That is, a matron and a miss.

Also, even earlier in the century, it was not uncommon for an older woman, matron or no, to have a young woman accompany her on such a trip, for the mutual benefit of both.

Witness: Aunt March and Amy in "Little Women."

As for Lizzie's going, she probably thought she ought to, deserved it even, and "all her friends were going."

It was probably well worth it to Andrew to get Lizzie out of the house for such a long period, and I wouldn't doubt if even Abby encouraged such.

Ironically, I suspect that Lizzie's "taste of honey" (and a taste of honey's worse than none at all!), her glimpse of the good life, only underscored her displeasure with the conditions at No. 92, as witnessed by her complaints to her shipboard roommate.

DJ, thanks for the amount of the Borden women's allowance. It seems so not fair for Abby to have to pay for any of the frills around the house. Andrew must have said he was fine as things are, and if she desired anything more she'd have to pay for them herself. They all lived in the house, and they all got the benefit of the stuff (well, not A & A's room). But even there, Andrew should have paid for things. It wasn't as if Abby was a spendaholic. I wonder if other husbands made their wives do that. I get the feeling it was just an "Andrew Borden thing".

I thought Abby was cleaning the guest room because the guest the previous night was her and Andrew's guest. Plus she wanted to make sure the room was neatened because she had company coming on Monday. Gosh, I wish we knew who that company was! I had asked at the several years ago, and they said they didn't know.

Ennyway, I thought that if the guest room or parlor got messed up because of one of the girls' guests, then they would have to clean it.

Well, Lizzie could have went thru high school but dropped out. There were some women who were doctors and lawyers back then. Men far outnumbered them. I wonder how difficult it was for these pioneering women to reach their intended profession.

The Grand Tour was a very popular trip that was usually associated with the wealthy. (Didn't the Tarleton twins speak of taking it in the book "Gone with the Wind"?) I think Lizzie took it to be chic, to fit in with her friends, and she did like to travel. I wonder how many times she went abroad in her lifetime. Ha! DJ's "all my friends are going" - she probably really did say that to Andrew.

Yes, I would think Abby was real glad to have Lizzie gone that long. And I'd think Andrew was too. He was always in the middle between first Emma and Abby, with Emma disliking her from the get-go. Then the last 5 years of both girls against Abby.

I wonder if 'the girls' ever took a trip together?

I never read "The Yellow Wallpaper", Allen. Thank you for posting some of it. It's good!

What I posted wasn't actually a part of the story The Yellow Wallpaper. It was something written by Gilman explaining what lead her to write the story. She actually was given this rest cure as she explains. The Yellow Wallpaper is about a woman who is forced into the rest cure by doctors and a husband who thinks he knows what is best for her. She is cut off from friends and family and kept in a yellow wallpapered nursery to "rest". She slowly descends into madness. The rest cure was prescribed, and could be prescribed against the patients will, for woman who were thought to be depressed, suffered from hysteria, or any of the other similar maladies men labeled women with at that time. They were to take a rest from any and all things that were thought to be too taxing on the mind or body. Including seeing other people and having any social interaction. I diagnosed her with postpartum depression because most people agree that is what probably prompted her to have these episodes beginning so near the birth of her first child.More of Gilman's "Why I Wrote the Yellow Wallpaper."

"For many years I suffered from a severe and continuous nervous breakdown tending to melancholia — and beyond. During about the third year of this trouble I went, in devout faith and some faint stir of hope, to a noted specialist in nervous diseases, the best known in the country. This wise man put me to bed and applied the rest cure, to which a still-good physique responded so promptly that he concluded there was nothing much the matter with me, and sent me home with solemn advice to "live as domestic a life as far as possible," to "have but two hours' intellectual life a day," and "never to touch pen, brush, or pencil again" as long as I lived. This was in 1887.

I went home and obeyed those directions for some three months, and came so near the borderline of utter mental ruin that I could see over.
Then, using the remnants of intelligence that remained, and helped by a wise friend, I cast the noted specialist's advice to the winds and went to work again — work, the normal life of every human being; work, in which is joy and growth and service, without which one is a pauper and a parasite — ultimately recovering some measure of power.

Being naturally moved to rejoicing by this narrow escape, I wrote The Yellow Wallpaper, with its embellishments and additions, to carry out the ideal (I never had hallucinations or objections to my mural decorations) and sent a copy to the physician who so nearly drove me mad. He never acknowledged it.

The little book is valued by alienists and as a good specimen of one kind of literature. It has, to my knowledge, saved one woman from a similar fate--so terrifying her family that they let her out into normal activity and she recovered.

But the best result is this. Many years later I was told that the great specialist had admitted to friends of his that he had altered his treatment of neurasthenia since reading The Yellow Wallpaper.

It was not intended to drive people crazy, but to save people from being driven crazy, and it worked."


I'm going to guess that the author of the book who stated that they received $4 a week allowance was probably was going by what was said in the witness statements. $200 a year translates roughly into $16 a month, or $4 a week.

Neurasthenia- is a psycho-pathological term first used by George Miller Beard in 1869[1] to denote a condition with symptoms of fatigue, anxiety, headache, neuralgia and depressed mood. The term had been used at least as early as 1829 to label a mechanical weakness of the actual nerves, rather than the more metaphorical "nerves" referred to by Beard in 1869.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neurasthenia

I was thinking, Augusta, that perhaps Andrew considered Bridget's wages part of Abby's allowance!

Yes, the allowance set-up wasn't fair, and I recall from testimony that Abby did complain about it, outside the household, which doesn't seem to have been typical behavior for her. It really must have bothered her.

Yes, whoever was supposedly expected on Monday-- such an important issue that the prosecution dropped. Guess the supposed visitors heard the bad news, and decided it would be a bad time!

Seriously, it ties in to some crucial questions-- was Bridget aware of said company?

I've wondered why she would be asked to wash windows on a Thursday when guests were theoretically due on Monday.
Why not wait until Saturday? Or, even Monday morning? Thursday may have been her "usual day," but it seems Abby would have been desirous that the windows be clean for the co.

Uncle John-- not so.

I've been thinking about Bridget going up to her room that day to lay down. The more I think about it, the more I believe it was probably customary for her to go up to her room whenever she had finished her work, and if there was nothing else that needed done before getting the next meal. She was after all the maid. Was it really proper for a maid to just hang out on the main floor of the home reading or lounging around when she had no work to be done? Or would it make more sense that she would go up to her room to read, rest, or do whatever it is she did with what little free time she had? I think it makes sense that she probably could be expected to go up to her room.

Living in a mill town for several years I can say that windows and things never stay clean very long. The smoke and pollutants coming out of the stacks in my old home town left nice gritty trademarks on anything sitting still. I think the windows were probably hard to keep clean with as many factories operating as there were in Fall River at the time. I've always been curious as to who would be coming to visit Abby on the Monday. Nobody stepped forward with any clue as to even a name. I'm wondering if this wasn't some kind of cover story for why Abby was in the guest room. Emma had been away and had no idea of what was going on in the house. If you think about it it would've been quite easy for Lizzie to say that Abby was up there because she had been expecting company. It was Lizzie who said Abby had been expecting company. But nobody knows who that company is. It sounds just as suspicious to me as the note go out. I've always been a fan of Lizzie luring Abby up there somehow. But it seems just as odd to me that Abby would have been up there straightening that room three days before the company was to arrive. And why would she be straightening that room unless she did not expect John Morse to spend the night there again.

I think Abby was a conscientious housekeeper, and wanted to change the bed so that the room would be presentable, with or without company expected. In any event, the bed would be "ready for next time."

Also, it was either that or make up the bed with "John Morse" sheets on them, or else leave the bed unmade.

He didn't give the impression that he was returning; indeed, he said he only had one day off from Davis's.

Of course, with J.M., who knows? Everything seems to be neatly circumscribed, down to the letter he's carrying in his coat pocket, giving him a purpose for being there. It's as if he has an answer ready for any question that could be asked.

Then again, he's just in the wrong place at the wrong time ... right?

As for Lizzie's testimony about the alleged Monday visitor-- it seems to be one of her monumental potential blunders, which she miraculously escaped without follow-up.

Who knows? Maybe Lizzie did encourage Abby to go up there? "Mrs. Borden, I am to receive company in the guest room this morning, and it's a fair sight. I'll be up in a few minutes to help." Or some such. The lie about co. on Monday would seem to indicate that Lizzie could well have been involved in giving an impetus to Abby to go up when she did. Awfully convenient for Lizzie, for whom timing was everything that a.m., with people in and out of the house.

Lizzie might have had to do more orchestrating than is credited her. Aside from perhaps maneuvering Abby upstairs at that time, I still think Lizzie bugged her Father about mailing the letter to Emma for her. Mails used to go at all hours, with responses sometimes arriving the same day. People used to check their mailboxes several times a day, if they had the chance or the inclination.

("Father, please see this gets off in the early post. It's ever so important." Could have been."

Also, if Mrs. Borden were *** expecting *** Lizzie to enter ("Mrs. Borden, I'll be up with the clean things in a few minutes"), then Lizzie would have had even more of an element of surprise in her attack.


**************************************************************************************************************************************************

I still maintain that Bridget's window-washing would have been odd, in the light of co. arriving. It would have made sense to wait a few days. I don't doubt that she was ordered to do so that a.m. My point is, I think Abby would have held off for a few more days, if indeed co. was coming that Monday.

DJ wrote:Of course, with J.M., who knows? Everything seems to be neatly circumscribed, down to the letter he's carrying in his coat pocket, giving him a purpose for being there. It's as if he has an answer ready for any question that could be asked. . .Then again, he's just in the wrong place at the wrong time ... right?

The whole JM thing makes me feel squidgy. I don't believe in coincidences, so I have to think that his presence in the home played some part in the events. There is simply no way to know what part he played at this point in time. His alibis are just too perfect for my taste, as well.

As for Lizzie's testimony about the alleged Monday visitor-- it seems to be one of her monumental potential blunders, which she miraculously escaped without follow-up.

This huge blunder and others are what make me think that Lizzie hadn't planned for the aftermath of the crimes, if she planned the exact murders at all. What I'm wondering now is whether Lizzie actually did confront Abby in the front bedroom, or whether the confrontation began somewhere else and the bedroom is where the murder occurred. If Abby had been trying to get away from Lizzie on the steps (or if she'd been surprised searching for something in Lizzie's room?), she might very well have run to the farthest point and been killed there. Has anyone explored this possibility?

I still maintain that Bridget's window-washing would have been odd, in the light of co. arriving. It would have made sense to wait a few days. I don't doubt that she was ordered to do so that a.m. My point is, I think Abby would have held off for a few more days, if indeed co. was coming that Monday.

You could be right. But we don't know what the household schedule was, what other chores were planned before Monday, etc. Do we know what the weather forecast was? If rain was predicted for the next couple of days, for example, that might have been the only day to do the windows. Also, nothing in human behavior is black and white. Abby might have wanted the windows washed and wanted Bridget out of the house at the same time. Or Lizzie might have set the whole thing up by complaining in Abby's presence - one or more times - that the windows were dirty.

However, my feeling is that Bridget being out of the house benefited someone. I think Abby was looking forward to telling Lizzie something that had to do with money, something that had come about as a result of John Morse's visit the night before. And I suspect that news was the final straw for Lizzie. That's just my working theory, of course. Feel free to change my mind!

I don't think Lizzie had much time between her (per testimony) speaking to Bridget at the side door (surely to ascertain that Bridget was preoccupied, and to set up the door being unlatched) and then getting upstairs to dispatch Abby, which appears to have been part of an ambush-- a surprise attack, if you will-- the better to catch Abby off-guard.

Remember, Abby had no defensive wounds on her arms or hands, and she was turned toward the interior bedroom wall, toward the head of the guest bed. These points also argue strongly in favor of Abby knowing her attacker.

*************************************************************************************************************************************************

What John Morse knew in advance and the true why's and wherefore's of his being there that fateful eve and a.m. will remain an enduring mystery of this case. Same goes for Emma, in her own way, given her open-ended departure, including the removal of most of her things.

It appears as if Lizzie left on her aborted seaside frolic with an enormous chip on her shoulder-- probably what sent Emma packing, too. However, Lizzie decides to return and nip it all in the bud, whatever it is--

Ms. Lincoln argues that it was the transfer of the Swansea farm property to Abby, with Uncle John as a go-between. However, it would seem as if evidence of this alleged happening would have been known by others and would have surfaced, sooner than later.

I believe Mr. Borden was planning to put his stocks in Abby's name, so that she would be protected in the event of his death. I think Lizzie and Emma found out about that, and wigged out.

I believe Emma and Lizzie thought they were far above Abby and her meager relations, and the thought of any of them riding around in a fine carriage, or living in a house, paid for with Borden money was more than they could bear.

I believe Andrew was probably planning to die intestate, so that Lizzie and Emma would have to slog through the courts to get theirs. Meanwhile, whatever Abby received would be gravy above and beyond the stocks.

It would have been embarrassing-- humiliating-- for Emma and Lizzie to go after their lawful inheritance. I can easily envision Andrew "punishing" them in that regard.

**************************************************************************************************************************************************

If that were the case, I can envision Emma appealing to her Uncle for assistance, to please aid and abet Lizzie (and herself, Emma) in preventing that from happening to his late sister's daughters.

Oh, and there may have been a nickel or two in the bargain for him. I get tired of hearing that he had five grand in the bank. So what? So did Emma, apparently. Not quite the same as 400 grand, though.

Uncle John arrived with a letter in his pocket from Andrew asking him to come and help him with business. In my opinion, Uncle John would have had far more to lose than to gain in helping Lizzie kill Andrew and Abby. Andrew and John seemed to be close friends in my opinion. Andrew asked for his opinion in business affairs, and he let him stay with the family whenever he pleased. There didn't seem to be any discord between Andrew, John, and Abby. Andrew seemed to be on better terms with his brother in law than he did with his own sister Lurana and her husband Hiram. If they were discovered John would spend the rest of his life in jail. He was a wealthy enough man who made his own way. He owned his own properties and did his own business. He also seemed to be pretty well liked. He did a lot of visiting around all of his life, and appeared to have many close acquaintances and friends he spent time visiting. He never lived on his own, he always had friends and family living with him. This seems to be the opposite of the Borden household where most people preferred to stay away. I think that in itself speaks about John's character. I've always found the newspaper article about the run away horse interesting as well. Uncle John stopped a run away horse and carriage in the street, before it could harm anyone. He appears to have been a little quirky, but for all intents and purposes in my opinion a pretty decent man. I have never thought he had anything to do with it.

I agree with you. I don't for a minute think John helped Lizzie in any way. Why would he?

While the bits of information we have about John do make him look like a suspect, mainly due to his very detailed alibi, it's clear we only have some clues and no idea what they mean. It's possible John was a very finicky man who always noticed everything and kept track of details at all times. That would mean his impeccable alibi was just that and nothing more.

Once again, it seems to me that all attempts to point the finger at someone other than Lizzie only serve to to make it even more clear that Lizzie is the murderer.

DJ wrote:Remember, Abby had no defensive wounds on her arms or hands, and she was turned toward the interior bedroom wall, toward the head of the guest bed. These points also argue strongly in favor of Abby knowing her attacker.

I read that Abby's body was most likely moved by investigators after the initial discovery. If that's the case, we can't know much from the position of her body in the photograph.

The absence of defensive wounds does not indicate that Abby knew her attacker. It only means that for whatever reason she did not raise her arms to try to stave off the blows. If, for example, she was ordered to kneel down and turn away and then hit with the sharp instrument, she might or might not have known her attacker.

I'm at a loss to understand why, if her position in the photograph is the same or nearly the same as the position in which she died, she would be in that position in the first place. What part of cleaning a bedroom would necessitate a person being in that place, in that position? Could she have been searching for something in John's possessions?