ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel
  • »
  • Education and Science»
  • History & Archaeology»
  • History of the Americas

Lizzie Borden: Forty Whacks to Infamy

Updated on September 28, 2016
Dean Traylor profile image

Dean Traylor is a freelance writer and teacher. He is a former journalist who has worked on various community and college publications.


“Lizzie Borden took an axe,

And gave her mother forty whacks,

When she saw what she had done,

She gave her father forty-one.”

— Anonymous newspaper pitch and skip-rope rhyme.
Lizzie Borden
Lizzie Borden

On a hot August day in 1892, a blood-curdling scream broke the silence within an affluent household in Fall River, Massachusetts. The scream awoke Bridget “Maggie” Sullivan, the Borden family house maid.

Maggie! Come down!” yelled the family’s youngest daughter, Lizzie. “Come down quick; Father’s dead! Somebody came in and killed him!

She jumped out of bed and rushed to Lizzie’s aid. To her horror, Maggie found Lizzie Borden standing near the hacked and bloodied body of her father, Andrew Borden (who was sprawled across his favorite couch).

Maggie wasted no time calling the police. They immediately arrived at the Borden estate and began the investigation. Their arrival didn’t go unnoticed. Adelaide Churchill, a neighbor, headed to the residence to console Lizzie and Abby Borden, the step-mother, who was unusually not present in the living room where the murder took place.

Churchill, however, would make the second gruesome discovery of the day. She went to the bedroom to find Abby – which she did. She screamed and the officers on the scene rushed up the stairs to the bedroom where they discovered Abby lifeless body in a pool of blood.

Word spread fast of the vicious double-murder. And Fall River residents feared a deranged killer was loose in their community. Yet, when all the evidence was gathered, everything pointed to one suspect: Lizzie Borden.

Thus began the legend of Lizzie Borden, the New England spinster who was accused of murdering her father and step-mother with a hatchet. The murders were heinous. But the outage of it would continue during and after her trial. It was the kind of stuff that drew the attention of a nation. Also, it would create an American icon in criminology that would endure for more than a century.

A Media Sensation

The crime was big news, thanks in big part to local and national media of the time. Seemingly every newspaper in the state – and soon after throughout the country began printing the gory details of the crime.

A Fall River Herald reporter described in length the condition of the bodies. He mentioned Andrew Borden’s face as “sickening.” Also, he wrote: “the left eye had been dug out…the face was hacked to pieces and blood had covered the man’s shirt.”

Hungry for such lured details, other newspapers from the east coast of the United States headed for the New England town. They too spared no ink getting the depiction of the crime in print.

Next, there were reports of a “boogey-man” as the suspected murderer. In the early days of the investigation, the newspaper reported, a “Portuguese laborer” or a “tall man” may have been responsible for the murders. It was known that the laborer had visited a few days earlier asking for money, which Andrew didn’t have. But what made him fearful were two things: he was tall and mysterious – possibly an outsider – and he was a foreigner. In turn-of-the century America, immigrants from non-English or Germanic countries were often viewed with distrust, misunderstanding and disdain. The Portuguese laborer was a perfect foil for this crime.

Guilty or Innocent?

Do you think Lizzie was guilty of the murder of her father and step-mother?

See results

Investigation Leads to Lizzie

Despite speculations from the country’s top newspapers, evidence of a Portuguese laborer never materialized. However, a suspect was starting to emerge. Investigators were beginning to turn their focus on Lizzie.

The clues indicated the murder was an inside job; the lack of a weapon and the concentration of blood and blood trails within the house indicated that it had to be someone within the Borden household. The oldest daughter, Emma, had an alibi. Lizzie, on the other hand, didn’t.

Another clue to Lizzie’s guilt was her inability to know exactly know where her step-mother was that morning. Also, the investigators were not convinced of her story that during the fifteen minutes when her father was being murdered in the living room, she was in the backyard barn getting sinkers for an upcoming fishing trip. The officers never found any footprints on the dusty floor where those sinkers were supposed to be.

On August 9, five days after the murder, Lizzie, Maggie, and a house guest were questioned at police headquarters. The interview added more suspicions. She gave the police contradictory answers and appeared to have changed her story.

That was enough for the police investigators. Two days later, Police Chief Hilliard arrested Lizzie.

Maggie concurred about the dress. She reported that Lizzie was wearing it on the morning of the murders. That was enough for the grand jury to indict.

The Trial Begins and the Legend Continues

The crime took on a life of its own. The incredulous public was in shock. Headlines throughout the country ran with the concept that a dainty young woman was responsible for the slaughter of her parents. How could this be? Women in high society were not your typical murderer.

The next day, Lizzie entered a plea of “Not Guilty” to the charge of murder. On August 22, she was arraigned by Judge Josiah Blaisdell who pronounced her “probably guilty”. The next phase in the legend was beginning.

In November, the grand jury met and heard damning evidence from witnesses including a family friend, Alice Russell, who had been visiting the Borden sisters in the days following the murders. She testified that Lizzie was burning a blue dress in a kitchen fire. When asked why she was doing it, Lizzie said the dress was covered with “old paint.”

Maggie concurred about the dress. She reported that Lizzie was wearing it on the morning of the murders. That was enough for the grand jury to indict.

Lizzie’s fate before the court appeared to be sealed. The evidence was stacked against her. However, Lizzie managed to hire a high-powered defense team that included Andrew Jennings and George Robinson (the former governor of Massachusetts). As the saying goes, they were the best lawyers money can buy. And that money went to good use.

Witnesses for the state had testified to Lizzie’s guilt. Yet, in the case of Maggie, some of them ended up recanting past remarks, or agreeing to possible theories of the defense. In one case, a family doctor who had prescribed morphine to Lizzie said the drug may have contributed to her contradictory statements during police examination.

A seed of doubt was planted; and before long it sprouted. In one case, evidence that she bought poison a few days before the murders or the rumors of tension between the girls and the parents were either squashed or not allowed in court. In the end, the prosecution only had circumstantial evidence and no murder weapon. As a result, the jury acquitted her on June 20, 1893.

Life After the Verdict

Lizzie didn’t escape the court of public opinion. Newspapers such as the New York Times ridiculed the verdict in scathing editorials. Family friends and citizens of Fall River steered clear of her. She was ostracized in her neighborhood and was forced to take refuge with her older sister Emma.

Eventually, even Emma distanced herself from Lizzie in 1905. By this time, Lizzie (who was beginning to go by the name of Lizbeth) had become a philanthropist giving upwards of $30,000 to a local animal shelter. She’d live the rest of her life as a spinster until her death in 1927 (Ironically, she’s buried by her parents).

Today, Lizzie’s name still lingers in Fall River. The Borden home is now a bed and breakfast inn and the mansion she lived her remaining days in, Maplecroft, is privately owned ( occasionally open for tours, however).

Either way, Lizzie Borden’s trial was a sensation on many levels. It involved brutal murders, an unusual suspect, and a travesty of the law that may have let a killer go free. And, of course, it has spawned numerous stories and set the precedent for high-profile trials for years to come.

© 2014 Dean Traylor


    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • profile image

      Vicki 20 months ago

      It was not my intention to start an argument or to discredit or attack you. I simply corrected false assertions. I have researched the Borden murders and based my comments on transcripts of the original witness statements, pretrial, and trial. I also have the Knowlton Papers (book) which are the transcribed legal files of the prosecution in the case as well as copies of original newspaper articles. A book by Leonard Rebello is also one of my best resources and I recommend it. I never claimed to be an expert.

      I purposely did not make any personal remarks about the author of this article. Again, I simply corrected assertions made in the article.

      I do have a blog and the intent is to present the facts of the Borden murders since there is a plethora of erroneous information on the Internet. However, I did not mention or promote my blog in my original comment.

      This is unfortunate and I am sorry you felt that it was personal. I can assure you it was not.

    • Dean Traylor profile image

      Dean Traylor 20 months ago from Southern California

      After a brief search for the source of the previous remark, I've come to the conclusion it is a sham. Viki, or whoever this person is, originally made her (or his) remark on Twitter, claiming I got some details incorrect. Her twitter handle was (sorry if I may have spelled it incorrectly, but then again, I'm not going to give this person any attention for his/her blog). She continued her "comments" on this hub, possibly believing that this will discredit a well researched article.

      Her undoing was when I spotted the Twitter using the same words. There, I discovered that I wasn't the only one she was lambasting. Evidently this "expert", attempted to shame others who had an opinion on the story.

      In many respects, "Vicki" may claim she lives in the town and is a curator or something that would lend her credence (although i didn't see anything like that on the blog). If she is an expert, she's way too close to it. Considering that I didn't call somebody by their real name when all evidence I searched indicate that one person went by two name is just trivial.

      Nothing boils my blood than people attacking others for nefarious reason. I believe this person was trying to increase audience to her site by posting her comments on Twitter (with a link to her site).

      Usually, I ignore these comments, but when it appears that someone is trying to run my name through the mud, I get mean and nasty.

    • profile image

      Vicki 20 months ago

      Maggie's real name was Bridget. Lizzie did not scream, she called for Maggie. Bridget did not call the police nor did she ever see Andrew Borden's body. No officers were in the house when the second body was found. Mrs. Churchill and Maggie found Abby's body in the bedroom because that's where Lizzie told them to look. There were no blood trails in the house. Just blood around the immediate vicinity of the victims. The questioning on August 9 was a formal inquest where Lizzie and others were questioned by the prosecution. Police witness statements were taken prior to this date. Bridget (Maggie) consistently testified that she didn't remember or know what Lizzie was wearing the morning of the murders. The prussic acid testimony as well as Lizzie's (incriminating) inquest testimony was excluded. She was acquitted because the jury of Victorian men did not believe a woman of her social standing and Christian activities could possibly commit such crimes. In fact, they did not even review the evidence. Also, the presiding justice instructed the jury that they must come up with a non-guilty verdict. Actually, Lizzie had broad public support. She had a fan club and she received over 200 pieces of mail a day immediately after the acquittal, many of them marriage proposals. There was a party and the 12 jurors took a picture of themselves as a group and presented it to Lizzie as a gift. Over many years Lizzie's public support waned and was ostracized in her own community.

    • FatFreddysCat profile image

      Keith Abt 3 years ago from The Garden State

      I just saw the movie "Lizzie Borden Took An Ax" about this case a few nights ago. Cool stuff.

    • Jodah profile image

      John Hansen 3 years ago from Queensland Australia

      Very interesting. I had heard of the case before but never knew the facts. Intriguing stuff. Thanks for sharing.