The San Francisco Call. Newspaper, December 22, 1898, Page 1

The Call " VOLUME LXXXV.-NO. 22. SAN FRANCISCO, THUI{SDAY. DECEMBER 22, 1898. PRICE FIVE CENTS. DUNNING PLEADS THAT HE SEEKS JUSTICE, NOT ‘ REVENGE, UPON MRS. BOTKIN Purged of Contempt by the Courtesy of the Defense. T was a day of varied interest at th trial yesterday of Mrs. Cordelia Botkin, The prosecut d its case and the the intro- | to make | ent to the jury bei P. Dunning was yvesterday the central figure interest. He was brought court the custody of the after a night in the County Jall placed or ight n She tion of Dunnin the close, purpose the result. divided with I d for r she stil N \ }i] was fa s \ ¥ » him t This jea her lov esented an ab- humiliation seemed to ¢ by his hearers than by | r wh intimate wi would not shown Before Dunning went on the stand Jisen: immel held the attention court and jury. As an expert on nschimmel went over the ound of dots and dashes, ves and all the dreary tech- of the critical ana s of From every consideration declared his positive be- note in the box of ca ss on the ad sweets. :y Knight offered the expert a of handwriting and asked if it the handwriting of Mrs. Dunning. mmel was not to be trapped and d time out of court in which to investigation. It is an Xperts.to decelve experts e clever forgeries, but Eisenschimmel ne most damaging | IS familiar with the game. v € o He had not been so careful, however, the ds ore, when he quietly slipped to the gallery of the courtroom and lis- ned to the testimony of Expert Ames. enschimmel vehemently protested that had no ulterior purpose, but the fact remained that he had gone to the court room, and the defense was glad that the been discovered. Theodore Kytka was the last handwriting expert placed on the witn tand by the prosecution. Kytka had made a ies of photographs of the exhibits in the e and had made the customary eritical analysis. He also was positive that Mrs. Botkin wrote all the letters and the addresses. After a cross-examination that was of no conse- plan of Mr. Me- mony i en a cused woman. McGowan know and was informed wi e to Mrs. Botk D host hatred towa ¢+ he owed to to compensate offenses In the n to belie that impelled him to bec £ Mrs. Botkin. McGo tisfled with the effect He asked to know the T spiclon toward ng's S 2 ce ka was relieved. The prosecu- 5 e hat with- e Botkin, and received ti rflr::»g:‘;‘w“m tion pla Chief Lees and Harry Pen- in one hour after the witness nington on the stand to close small gaps ed that Mrs. Botkin s sista the case for the people was closed. Dover he was convinc e chain of evidence and then the As- then drew from the witness on that he had been in collu- his mistress to deceive his wife, while he Wa eeding on 1 New York he sent letter a Botkin. This phase of th developed pathetically al. Dunning’s letters, writ ”j:lnr!.vl Porto Rico to Mrs. read in court. The epist except for their refer As fense could not proceed. McGowan an- nounced that the defense will be ready this morning and an adjournment was taken until then. Upon the opening of court Mr. Hosmer, | the prosecuting officer, asked for the dis- missal of the case inst J. G. Edwatds, charged by Andrew J. Clunie witn libel. T o reat events of which Dunning as | Mr. Edwards printed the alleged libelous E correspondent had been an | articles in his insurance paper. Judge a participant. | Cook dismi r would expri ent, but not by . He of Mr. Clunie, the complainant. John P. Dunning was in the courtroom, | but not being called retired to the Judge’s | chamber: it and told her in p: his mistress we . He remained within call. what was happening at the seat of war. | Car! :nschimmel, the writing expert, On August nning wrote his last | resumed his exposition of the peculiarities letter to his He was at the | of Mrs. Botkin's handwriting. He first city of Ponce, in Porto Rico, and drove | up the quotation marks in the hone miles In a carriage to the seaside note and dissected them, finally ng the conclusion that they characteristics of M bore all Jostoffice to mail his epistle of affection. | Biavias Botkin's hand- Having mailed his letter he returned to Ponce and went without delay to the | writing. In the letter “C” he found a able office. He there found waiting for | certain angularity which is in all Mrs, a cablegram telling him that his [ Botkin’s writine. In one specimen of wife had been poisoned and was dead. His | Mrs. Botkin's known handwriting, that of offense to his home and his family had | her Healdsburg address, given Mrs. Price, orne {ta fril there were four and all had th Dunning was then released from the | characteristic angularity. The anon witness stand. Judge Cook then set aside | mous letters, he said, were fairl bri his own order confining Dunning to the | tling with evidences of Mrs. Botkin's County Jail. In committing the witness | handwriting with but feeble attempt at the custody of the Sheriff Judge Cook ed that he had simply done his A question had been asked by the defense and the questioner was entitled r the law to an answer. With the stion there was no it »n for punishment. The ques- ion had been of such a character, the Judge continued, that he did not feel that he should inflict a fine as well as impris- onment. He therefore ordered Dunning | most vertical and the “1” slanting. reieased from custody. “] call your attention to the word The prosecution had very little more to ] ‘Madam,” ”” said the expert. *Compare se” in ‘please” was written by her, being identical with standards of her writing. These two letters were Invaria- bly written off the line. and much higher than any others. This is apparent in her known Writing, according to the expert. There is a decided difference of slant be- tween the * and 1" that is noticeable roughout her writing, the “p” being al- Botkin wrote the anony- | the package of | District Attorney announced that | Attorney Knight was not present the de- | d the charge at the request | the ‘d’ in that ‘madam’ in this other letter. arity of the ‘d’ in those cases. That s produced in a peculiar manner, such as I have never seen before.” To the jurors, producing a microscope: “I W a brief description of this in- | strument.” Knight—You needn’t; we don't want it. The expert ran counter to Knigut short- v after when he told the jurors it was not ne ry to use the glass to note | what he desired to show them. | Knight—Who do you mean does not fini | it nec The expert—I do not. Knight—You are not in this testimony. | The expert then drew attention to tne letter “c” made by Mrs. Botkin. He spoke of its abnormal size, being double the | height of any other space letter. To Ju- | ror J. F. Myers he said it was impossible to judge of handwriting by form alone, and that the peculiarities ran through both capitals and small letters. In conclusion, the expert said he thought he had established to the jury his belief | that all the handwriting in evidence had been written by the same person. | In the course of a harsh cross-examina- tion Knight elicited the information that | Eisenschimmel occupied a place in the | gallery of the courtroom while his col- | ieague, Expert Ames, was on the witness word to the stand. The expert sald that what he meant by the “pen habit” and “writing | habit” was the habitual manner in which writing was produced. He explained that | paying tellers of banks were experts in a certain way. They look at a check and get an impression by which they are able to judge as to genuineness, but cannot explain how they reach that conclusion. “Mrs. Botkin has positive peculiarities or characteristics,” said the expert. Q.—Well, what do you find? A.—She writes the angular or so-called English hand. Q.—What kind of arm movement? A.— Partly finger, partly forearm—a combined | movement. ind any characteristics of Mrs. Botkin's handwriting? A.—Yes, many of | them. Q.—Give one. A—In the word ‘“place” the letter “p” has one slant and the "I another. Q—That is a Botkin characteristic? | A.—Not in every case. There is no rule. Q.—Is this the first time in your life you ever saw a “p” and an “1” that looked anything like those? A.—Yes. The witness said that the “baby” note was in Mrs. Botkin's handwriting, the only attempt at disguise being in the slant of the letters. He was handed a piece of paper by Mr. Knight, but de- | clined to touch it or pass upon it, saying | | it was not an exhibit in the case. Knight's | efforts to force the witness to express an | opinion offhand as to the writing brought | Hosmer to the rescue and developed some | more of the schoolgirl repartee which has enlivened the proceedings from time to time. “Don’t interrupt me when I am talk- | ing,” said Hosmer. “Some one else has a | right to be heard here besides you.” “Well, you've been talking for two | days,” was the rejoinder. | IWhen the expert retired finally Judge | Cook said: “Call John P. Dunning.” To | the latter he said: “Mr. Dunning, it is | the desire of the court that you should | have an opportunity, at least every twenty-four hours, of reconsidering your | determination not to answer the question | put to you by Mr. Knight on Monday.” Turning to Mr. Knight he said: “Mr. Knight, do you insist upon the question?" After a short conference with his asso- clates Mr. Knight said: “May it please the court, I will withdraw the request for the names of the ladies.” Court—Proceed with’ the cross- six women with whom you were on inti- mate terms whose names you do not re- member. How many are there whose names you remember, but do not wish to give? A.—Three. Q.—Do you know Mrs. Corboley, and did you have any business relations with her? A.—She loaned money to myself and Mrs. Dunning. It was $800 in all. The witness said he wrote to Mrs. Bot- kin while on the train between here and e _Ih came a witness. Defenders of the Accused to Open Their Case This Morning. Message of Death That Followed Close 'DUNNING DECLARED THAT HE SOUGHT NO’f VENGEANGE BUT JUSTICE. John P. Dunning is again at liberty. The legal defenders of Mrs. Botkin withdrew their question in reference to the man’s gay companions, and he was released from the County Jail. Under cross-examination yesterday he declared dramatically that he sought to satisfy no vengeance on Mrs. Botkin, but was a witness simply from a sense of duty and with a purpose to compensate as far as he may for his past life. He was con- vinced, he said, that Mrs. Botkin was concerned in the death of his wife, and inspired by that conviction be- Upon a Missive of Love. develop? A.—When I heard of an im- portant happening several months ago. It came within one hour after I reached Dover and learned of the circumstances surrounding the death of my wife and my sister-in-law. Their death by poisoned candy directed my suspicions toward Mrs. Botkin. Up to that moment I had no suspicions against Mrs. Botkin. The first telegram only told me of her death by supposed confectionery poisoning. I had no suspicions against any one else, al- though I told the officers of the law that Mrs. Ruoff and the druggist who sold the arsenic might be useful witnesses. I re- ferred to Mrs. Ruoff as a witness and not as a principal. I knew of her confiden- tial relations with Mrs. Botkin. Q—Explain your hostility toward Mrs. Botkin. A.—It arises because of the death of my wife. Q.—What was the first thing to cause you to think of Mrs. Botkin in connection with the pofsoning of your wife? A.—Be- cause of the relations that had existed previously between us and of the feeling she had for me, or that I thought she had for me. In my own heart I did not think any one else would do it. The witness learned of his wife's death at 6 p. m. August 13. An hour before that time he drove to Ponce, Porto Rico, and mailed a letter to Mrs. Cordella Botkin in this city. This was the last communi- cation of any character Dunning has had since’ that moment with the woman now on trial for her life. The letter reads: PONCE, Porto Rico, August 13, 1898. Dear Ada: I have been here about dead to the world for two or three weeks, With- out eay means of getting any mail and very little chance of getting any away. Just before I left Kingston I wrote you asking you to address me at St. Thomas, but have never been there yet, having come here direct, and I have recelved no mail. We got the news to-day that peace had been declared, and I suppose I will be go- ing to New York soon, but I know nothing particular about it. I will have to send you an address when I get to New York, and you had better not send any more mail to St. Thomas, ably not go there now. the most beautiful island I have ever seen, and I have been almost constantly in the saddle since I have been here, wearing holes in my anatomy. I am really sorry the war is over, for I have certainly enjoyed it and I am in considerable uncertainty about the kind of work I will do when I get to New York. I am perfectly well, but it is hot- ter than blue blazes here. I hope every- \ thing has continued to be well with you. With my love, J. Theodore Kytka, pen artist and photo- | grapher, succeeded Dunning in the wit- | ness chair. He was shown the various | examples of handwriting, and without go- ing into the customary painful expla- nations, testified that they were in Mrs, Botkin’s handwriting. He was taken through a profitle: cross-examination by Attorney C. M. Wheeler of Humboldt, Wwho gave a clever imitation of George Knight in one particular. He could lean New York. He wrote again between that point and Tampa, Fla. In answer to fur- ther questions he said he did not remem- ber ever having suggested to Mrs. Bot kin that she go to New York and liv He did not remember ever telling her that he would like to have her there. \ He telegraphed his wife before he left here, and again had a friend apprise her of his coming when he reached Chicago. Q.—Why did you write to Mrs. Bot- kin? A.—I told her I would, and Kknew she expected to hear from me Q.—When you left Mrs. Botkin at Oakland there was no rupture between you? There was no good-by forever, this is all off, or anything of that kind, was there? A.—No; there was no ruptuffe. I understood in my own mind that I was not coming back to San Francisco, but I did not tell Mrs. Botkin so. Dunning again told in outline of the contents of the anonymous letters; about him drinking himself to death; of the life he had led in this city, and of his finan- cial difficulties not due moiely to his losses upon the race track. His wife sent him a copy instead of the original, but why he did not know. He did not get the orig- inal and send It to Mrs. Botkin. He had never asked for the original, although he interested in knowing who wrote it. He' did not know why he had not asked for it. Q.—Did Mrs. Botkin ever express a de- sire to injure your wife or suggest that you secure a divorce? A.—She never ex- pressed such a desire nor made such a suggestion. Q.—Did not she divide her last morsel of bread with you when vou were at 927 Geary street? A.—She did. Q.—Didn’t she nearly starve with you when vou had hardly a boiled rag be- tween you? A.—Yes, sir. Q.—She gave you money to assist you which she received from her husband? A.—She gave me money; I don't know where she got it. Q.—She sent you money to Salt Lake to bring you home, where you could get an- other position? A.—She did. Q.—When you left here you wrote three or four letters to her and sent one tele- gram to your wife? A.—Yes, sir. On redirect examination Mr. Hosmer drew from him the information that he had spent considerable money on Mrs. Botkin’s pleasures. He also testified that he knew of only two anonymous let- ters until after his wife's death. Witness said he never told Mrs. Botkin to come to New York. Upon his return from the war he purposed having his family join him, and they were to make their home in New York. The witness said he had no letters written him by Mrs. Botkin; he had destroyed them all. He had received no letter from her since the death of his wife. He had received answers to all his except the last one he sent. The hour for adjournment having ar- rived Judge Cook addressed Dunning and said that although he had been guilty of contempt of court in refusing to answer a question when directed to do so by the court, yet his Honor did not think it was a case where further punishment should be inflicted, especially when Mr. Knight had voluntarily withdrawn his question. Dunning was, therefore, purged of his contempt and set at liberty. Dunning was the first witness of the afternoon. In answer to Mr. Hosmer he said Mrs. Corboley was an intimate friend of his family. They were born near one another in the South on the border line between Maryland and Delaware. Their families had known one another for years, She was much older than he and was an intimate friend of his wife. He said none of the exhibits of writing in evidence re- sembled hers. In the absence of Attorney Knight Sen- ator Frank McGowan took the witness through a severe cross-examination. Dunning said that Mrs. Botkin knew Mrs. Corboley as a friend of Mrs. Dunning. He had told her so when telling her of the financial transaction between them. He had never had any Intimacy or rela- tion whatever with Mrs. Corboley except this. Regarding Mrs. Calimbertie he said he had but a slight acquaintance with her. The writing was not hers. Asked as to why he mentioned her name to his wife he sald it was because he wanted to give a plausible excuse. He first thought of Mrs. Seeley, but to men- tion her name would be to entangle him- self in a maze from which he might find it hard to extricate himself. McGowan asked if he had sustained any intimacy with Mrs. Calimbertie and Dunning said he had not. McGowan—If you had would you tell? ‘Witness—I would decline to answer. He sald he had deceived his wife and had written her falsehoods, as he had to get out of the trouble brought on by the anonymous letters, Asked as to why he had not told her some one else he replied he had thought of no one else at the time. He knew it was false and knew it was an injustice to this woman to point the finger of suspicion at her, but at the moment he thought it would never come out. Q.—Did you suspect Mrs. Seeley? A.—T thought she had ill feeling aginst me. Q.—For what reason? A.—About four months before Mrs. Botkin wrote her an insulting letter. She knew of the intimate relations existing between Mrs. Botkin and myself, and I thought she might have suspected me of instigating it. Q.—Did you know Mrs. Seeley was an enemy?. A.—I had no other reason for was. iy Sid you not mention Mrs. See- ley's name to your wife? A.—Because it as gracefully on the rail of the witness- stand as Mrs. Botkin's leading attorney. The resemblance ceased there. He dres from the witness the statement that the wrapper from the candy box had been froned out. He had forgotten that Chief Lees had testified to this early in tne trial. He then tried to prove by the wit- ness that the passaage of the iron over the paper had changed its appearance en- | tirely. The most the witness would ac- knowledge was that the ironing had not removed the original creases but had merely leveled them. Mr. Hosmer then placed Chief Lees on the stand to explain how he had done the terrible washing and ironing to which the bit of paper had been subjected. *Mr.” Lees, as Senator McGowan persisted in calling him, told how he had handled the wrapper. The venerable Police Chief, who looks more and more like a real flesh and blood Santa Claus, was cross-examined to no purpose. “If your Honor please,” said Mr. Hos- mer, “the prosecution rests its case.” Judge Cook—Let the defense proceed. Mr. McGowan then addressed the court, saying the defense did not expect the prosecution to conclude at so early an our and was not prepared to place its witnesses on the stand at that time. He asked that the case go over until th: woul® expose the relations existing be- tw;t;en Mrs. Botkin, Mrs. Seeley and my- self. Q.—You wanted to shield yourself? A.— I certainly did; that was the main reason I put the blame on Mrs. Calimbertie. I had to give some name that would ap- pear plausible to my wife. Q.—You knew of the trouble between Mrs. Botkin and Mrs. Seeley? A.—I did. Q.—Was it directed against you? A.— ; it was on- account of contemplated divorce proceedings between Mr. Botkin and wife. Q.—You speak of close intlmacy. What do you mean by that expression? A.—I told you at length of the life led by my- self and Mrs. Botkin. I trled to avold speaking too plainly. Q.—Well, what was its nature? was improper. swer? Q—I want an answer. A.—My rela- tions with Mrs. Botkin were such as a married man has no right to have with a married woman or any other woman. (A long pause.) I have been with her and have remained over night in her apart- ments. The court here interposed an objection e A of Qeciicy And Ahe Question | it Tie SANE the B Shoups b s e ing on that line ceased. B E | its right to an opening statement, = The witness was asked as to a feeling | served the rightpm call Mrs. Haj r:\;z {sr of hostility he bore toward Mrs. Botkin. | further cross-examination. He said he had such a feeling, but it was | Judge Cook agreed to the continuance, not one looking toward vengeance. He | S2YINg the trial was making most sati i o 0 factory progress—that sixty-eight vi came here as a witness to “condone” for i ; G nesses had been exam ‘en day the faults of his past life of excess. o ou duy | The defense will commence its senta- Q.—When did this feeling of hostility | tion of Mrs. Botkin's case at 10 o ciack FIRST CALIFORNIA : TO COME HOME FROM MANILA WASHINGTON, Dec. 21.—When the announcement was made at the War Department to-day that 50,000 volunteers would be imme- diately - mustered out The Call correspendent inquired particularly about the First California Regiment, now at Manila. “It will be included in this order,” said General Corbin. Formal orders were issued for the Fourth Infantry, Twelfth In- fantry and Seventeenth Infantry (all regulars) to leave on the trans- ports Mobile and Berlin from New York January 15 for Manila via the Suez canal. The two other regiments to be sent there will prob- ably go via San Francisco. 000000000000000000000000000000000 ATt Do you want further an- 00000000000 ©o0000000O000