The San Francisco Call. Newspaper, December 23, 1898, Page 1

The Call to This Paper not be taken from the Library.++++ e———a SAN FRANCISCO, FRIDAY, DECEMBER 23, 1898. PRICE FIVE CENTS. MRS. CORDELIA BOTKIN PLEADS WITH HER JUDGES FOR HER LIFE The Accused Woman Denies the Accusations of the Prosecution and Tells Her Own Startling Double Record | of a Dayin a Great | City. RS. CORDELIA BOTKIN has appeared as a witness before the court and jury that are trying her for her life. She has told of her career in this city, particu- larly since she met John P. Dun- ning and gave to him perhaps all the fidelity that a woman can give. M Botkin has wept upon the witne stand in mock seriousness or honest reflection of scenes and incidents that reached a climax in the death of two innocent women. Mrs. Botkin has held | hundreds of men and women in listen- | ing silence at the recital of tragic events. She has lisped her story of fllicit love and domestic infidelity into the ears of hundreds of morbid hearers. She has denied trat she was concerned, in the remotest degree, In the death of John P. Dunning’s wife or Mrs. Deane. Mrs. Botkin proved to be the sur- prise of the defense. When she was | called as a witness she saw an oppor- tunity to pose, and she accepted Her manner on the witness stand justi- fled the sobriquet of “little English woman” that she has received. Mrs. Botkin was never nearer England than the boundary line of Missouri, but she affected with more or less success the affectations that most Americans be- lieve to be English. accused woman told how and | e she met John P. Dunning. She | ared that she assisted the prosecut- | wit when he was in sore finan- | She said that she found | harassed by creditors and in daily | st n of the h hand of the law. Her womanly sympathy was excited, | and she aided him the best she could. | “Willingly and kindly,” she said, she | helped h t of his difficulties and | he became a constant attendant at her | sic ing, To cover the ground that other wit- nesses had touched upon, Mrs. Botkin | to a minute description of lhe' wacted ~t 927 Geary | g she paid her com- Seeley, and while de- | claring that = did not like the woman, she admitted that her &on’s interests demanded certain concessions | to the lady, whose age will not bear | a critical inspection. Mrs. Botkin was perfectly frank in outlining her rela tions betwen herself and her husband. “1 gave him my youth,” she said, “and | I will not permit him to divorce me | now.” haunting her apartments and liv- it seemed, as she commanded. liments to Mrs. Mrs. Botkin spoke quickly and nerv- ously. There was neither break nor hesitation in her story. Now and | again she forgot her crude English accent and spoke in that Americans understand. e told, sub- stantially as the story has been related before, the relations between her and | Dunning. She passed quickly over | the scenes that marked her parting | with her lover and discussed the inci- | dents that came with the accusation of herself. In most positive terms, | embellished here and there with a sjanner and method that were essen- | tially melodramatic, she declared that she had never bought a box of candy in the “shop” of George Haas. Fur- ther than that, ste declared she had never been in the “shop” of |;r=urze} Haas in her life. | Time and again her attorney would interject a question, and when he did not Mrs. Botkin would ask dramatically if she should continue. She denied | positively that she had ever bought a | handkerchief at the City of Paris, flnd" £he declared that during her residence | at the Victoria Hotel no parcel, from the City of Paris or any other local | “shop,” had been sent to her. : Mrs. Botkin spoke her story as if she‘ had learned it by heart. More than once the court reporter was forced to ask her to speak more slowly. The lad was by no means excited. She overlooked no detail in the long tale. Her discussion of poisons at Stockton after the announcement of the Dover murders was a critical point. She cov- | ered it by declaring that “heavy” medi- | d been prescribed for her, and | » of them she discussed their She main- effect her physician. na | tained that on Ju , the critical day of t never left hor' apartmer t cept to telephone to her phys [ It was then that her attorney asked | her a stra question. He demanded | to know what happened to Mrs. Botkin ed that the wife and »)hn P. Dunning had been poisoned. Mrs. Botkin replied | that the news threw her inte uncon- sciousness for s a1 hours. “And how | do you now?” the attorney asked. | “I feel most ¢ ' w strange | reply. And Mrs gt Her tears were q when she began the discu A. Livernash. She an came to her and won her confidence | on the plea that she had felt as Mrs. | Botkin felt and with a fellow feeling | felt compassion. Mrs. Botkin then de- | tailed all the secret history of the | strange relations between herself and her husband, and when the hour of ad- | journment came she was still on the | witness stand under direct examina tion. She will resume her test!monyi this morning. | Mrs. Botkin was not the only import- ant witness placed on the stand by the defense. Dr. George M. Terrill testi- | fied that on the afternoon of July 31, | 1898, he attended Mrs. Botkin at her | apartments in the Victoria Hotel. As| Story. he recalled the hour it was between 3 and 5 o'clock In the afternoon. He found Mrs. Botkin in her apartments robed in a yellow gown and he re- | mained with her to chat for over half an hour. This testimony was of vital import- ance, as the prosecution had already introduced evidence to show that at that very hour on that day Mrs. Bot- kin was at the store of George Haas. Two witnesses have testified to this as- sertion and a third has sworn that Mrs. Botkin, fully dressed and laden with parcels, wi her return from a shopping tour. Dr. Terrill had no memorandum to sup- port his tion that he had attended Mrs. Botkin on that day and he ad- mitted that he was scrupulously care- ful in making a record of every visit that he had made professionally. A witness was also during the entire month of Juue, 1897. It was on June 18, 1897, that an anon mous letter was mailed from this cf n the hall of the hotel on | introduced to | n show that Mrs. Botkin was at Eureka | defense. witness stand to show their profes- sional belief that the only sure test of arsenical poisoning in case of death is an autopsy. This evidence was in- tended to meet the serious proposition that no autopsy was performed by the Delaware authorities on the bodles of Mrs. Dunning and Mrs. Deane. The conduct of routine business in the City of Paris was then discussed with a purpose of showing that Mrs. Harris did not do what she clakmed to have have done. It is a significant fact that in the City of Paris there is no record of the purchase which it is claimed Mrs. Botkin made. The ac- cused woman will be on the witness stand this morning. THE PROCEEDINGS. Dr. George F. Tertill, a physician and surgeon of this city, was the first wit- ss called by Attorney Knight for the He testified to knowing Mys. Botkin and that he attended her at the Victoria Hotel, in this city, on the after- noon of July between 3 and 5 o'clock. He was summoned by telephone shortly 1, to Mrs. Dunning. The prosecution has | before 3 o’clock and went at once to the | He had an entry in his book regarding the operation he had performed on the morning of the 3ist, when his brother and Dr. Deardorff were present and assisted him. The witness could not remember statements he had made to reporters at Seattle, where he was visiting at the time of the murders, and when Mrs. Bot- kin was first under suspicion. He did re- member that he had said Mrs. Botkin could have gone out, that she was not too ill for that. He did not remember why he had re- mained a half hour with his patient when he could have prescribed for her illness in a few minutes. He said they chatted after his professional duties had been per- formed. Mr. Hosmer finally abandoned his at- tempt to pin the witness down in the mat- ter of time regarding his visit and took up the matter of poisoning by arsenic. After a number of questions the witness said he was not an expert on arsenical | poisoning. He did not know of any way to be sure of a case of poisoning from that drug but by- an autopsy. He was asked If a person had said they had taken arsenic and he had seen the usual symp- toms in the patient, would he be satisfied as to the cause of death without the for- y 1topsy. He said the latter re way to detect the pres- ence of the drug. Thomas W. Ford, superintendent of the mail service at the San Francisco post- office, was the xt witness. He was of the impetuous class of witnesses and had to be curbed repeatedly by Judge Cook. He was fir: asked to e it looked like a San Francisco postmark and contained originally either second, third or fourth class matter. There was no way of telling where it had been mailed or the day or hour. shown the wrapper and was | nine the postmark. He said | is now. The witness said it would all de- pend upon the packing. sent through the mails are not destroyed by rough usage. He would not swear posii- | tively that the postmark on the wrapper was that of this city, although it had its general appearance. He thought the post- mark freakish, as there seemed to be some letter missing. The witness said the box was insufficiently packed for trans- mission if it contained soft candies. Hard candies would not make so much differ- ence, as they were not-so liable to be crushed. A To a juror he said it was his duty to examine all parcels to determine whether they would stand shipment. It was not possible to examine all packages minute- ly and some might pass through without being detected. Hosmer asked if it were not a fact that dynamite had on a number of occasions escaped the vigilant inspectors and passed through the mails, and the witness said it was true. The witness was cautioned not to try to convince the jury that the box of candy never passed through the mails. John P. Dunning was recalled and Mr. Hosmer asked: “When Mrs. Dunning and your little girl went from San Francisco to the home | of Mr. Pennington in Dover, Del., and re- mained there, did Mrs. Botkin know they had left San Francisco and had gone there?"” “Yes, through me. I had told her a num- ber of times where they were and that they would remain there.” Mrs. Grace Harris was recalled by Mr. Knight. Judge Cook asked the purpose |'of his questions regarding her past life and was told it was for the purpose of at- tacking her credibility. She was asked if To Mr. Hosmer he sald all packages | ANGER TO THE STATE IMPENDING TREASURY IS ALMOST DEPLETED. Sharp Lawyers of San Francisco and Sacramento Advise County Treasurers Not- to Settie With the State Con- troller. The truth now coming to light con- cerning the true inwardness of con- tracts existing between certain lawyers of this city and Sacramento on one side and forty-three counties of the State on the other leads to the conclu- sion that there will not be sufficient | money in the public treasury on the first day of January next to meet the 77 RS BOTKIN A Tqg QSECUTION SAW HE P%N JUNE 8TH 9y TORG INSIST, 0SECU HER PR 157 1898 I ON JULY 3| S~ ( MRS. Dover With the Poisoned Candy. RS BOTKIN BOUGHT (AND // CORDELIA BOTKIN AS HER PROSECUTORS AND HER DEFENDERS SEE HER. Mrs. Cordelia Botkin Became Yesterday a Witness in Her Own Behalf. She Denied That She Had Ever Purchased Candy at the Store of George Haas or That She Had Bought the Handkerchief That Way' Sent to She Justified All of the Comments That Have Been Made of Her. The Weman Was an Interesting Study on the Witness-Stand. MRS BOTKIN AS SHE. DECLARES SHE WAS MRS BOTKIN'S PRYSICIAN | DECLARESTHAT SHE WAS JLL ON JULY 3157 ns9sl and Dunning, and With Marked Cleverness of Expression Grazed the Preclpice That Would Have Made These Relations Improper. She Outlined the Relations Between Herself introduced a great deal of testimony to show that Mrs. Botkin wrote this anonymous letter. The defense shows that at that time Mrs. Botkin was over 200 miles away from San Francisco. The prosecution hopes to show that at i hotel. He found her dressed in a yellow Mr. Knight then asked a series of ques- | wrapper and reclining on a loungs in her | tions, to which Mr. Hosmer objected, and Eureka there was a mail ba~, the con- | tents of which was not opened and stamped until after it reached this city. The defense 2lso placed upon the wit- | ness stand the superintendent of the mail, but they proved nothing except | that as a witness for the defense the superintendent was noticeabl” accom- modating. His name is Thomas W. Ford. He discussed, with considerable | satisfaction to himself, what might have happened if the rules of the post- office had been obeyed. He was not even willing, in his solicitude for the defense, to admit that the box of can- dies had passed through the malls. During the afternoon session the de- fense called Mrs. Grace Harris for cross-examination. The result was nothing more serfous than the fact that Mrs. Harris has so far forgotten her | matronly modesty as to go into the back room of a saloon to quench her thirst. Two physicians were placed on the | a general room. She complained of headache and feeling of illness, which he prescribed. He was tnrough in a few minutes and then remained chat- ting with Mrs. Botkin for nearly an hour. ) witness said he had no record of the it in any account book or memor- andum, but fixed the date accurately by two other appointments. First of these was an operation he performed t morning at a hospital on Oak street, and the further fact that he went from Mrs. Botkin's rcom to the home of H. 8 Foote, where he dined by appointment. Before the witness left the stand Mr. Knight asked him what was the sure test for arsenical poisoning and he said that as far as he knew an autopsy was the only conclusive test. To Mr. Hosmer he said he had known Mrs. Botkin a year and had attended her twice at his office. He had made no charge for his services to the woman. The witness was positive that it was be- tween 3 and 4 o'clock that he attended Mrs. Botkin at the hotel on the occasion referred to, but could give no reason why he fixed the time so definitely. He did not know how long after the 3lst of July he was asked to recall the date of his visit and the circumstances attending it, but he thought it was fully two months, for all of | his objections were sustained. They were to the effect that there was a rule of the postoffice that candy in an ordinary box could not be mailed. Mr. Knight said that he claimed the package had never gone through the mails at all. He criticized the objections of the prosecution, saying it was a slender thread on which to hang a person for murder. Knight finally with- drew the question after the matter had been warmly argued. Knight finally went off on another tack, asking the witness to explain what usage the package would receive in transmis- sion from here to its destination. Hos- mer was much interested In the examina- tion of the witness and stood up. This exasperated Knight, who asked him to be seated and to remain seated during his examination of witnesses for the defense. “I don’t want to look through you. You may be opaque or obrien. I want the same treatment I accorded you.” The witness then proceeded to explain the various hands through which the package would pass. He dwelt long and fondly on the word ‘‘thrown,” using it with many variations and in many keys. He was shown the box and asked if it could cross the continent and remain un- broken and in the condition in which it she knew Mr. Conroy, a saloonkeeper on California and Hyde streets. She was to the saloon and drinking there. Judge Cook would not permit the question which | Knight said was for the purpose of show- ing that her visits were open and noto- rious to everybody. Knight then attacked her present life on Market street, but Hosmer entered a protest, saying he ob- Jected to the language and that no good end would bd served. Knight agreed with him to the extent of saying that he could not ask such questions of a lady. He finally excused the witness, but later in the day she placed herself within his reach unwittingly and was given another | scoring. W. H. Robarts of Mendocino County was the next witness, He is married to one of Mrs. Botkin's sisters. In June, 1897, when one of the anonymous letters | was mailed in this city, he was agent for the steamer Humboldt, plying between | San Francisco and Eureka. He testified | that Mrs, Botkin arrived at Eureka on | the steamer Pomona on June 2, 1808. She remained at his house throughout the month, with the exception of one day, spent at Ferndale with her father. The progress .of the examination of the wit- Continued on Second Page. asked if she was in the habit of going | usual expenses of the State rovern- ment for one month. A history of the events and incidents leading up to this | remarkable and deplorable state of af- | fairs is interesting from many points of view and the sequel may show how the people can be plundered under the guise of the law. & It is a matter of record that County Treasurers throughout the State on the advice of Boards of Supervisors have refused recently to make the gustomary settlements through the Controller with the State Treasurer. The question will be asked why do they refuse at this time? In replying to this question a review of the laws relating to the col- lection of State taxes by the various | counties becomes important. Under a law which held a place among the living statutes until Fet- ruary 23, 1893, counties were allowed certain commissions or fees for the cel- lection of the State’'s share of taxes. In 1893 the Legislature repealed this act allowing commissions for collec- tion. Following is the text of the act of repeal: An act to abolish commissions or fees paid by the State for the assessment, equalization, auditing and collection of all valorem taxes. Approved February 23, 1892. The people of the State of California, represented in Senate and Assembly, do | enact as follows: Section 1—All commissions or fees paid by the State to the officers of any county, | or city and county, for services rendered in the assessment, equalization, auditing and collecting of ad valorem taxes are hereby abolished: provided, that this shall not affect the commissions paid to the Assessors of the several counties for services rendered in the collection of per- sonal property taxes, as provided by chapter eight of the Political Code, or the mileage allowed to the Treasurers of the several counties, or cities and coun- ties, in making settlements with the State as provided by section three thousand eight hundred and seventy-six of the Po- litical Code. Sec. 2—All acts or parts of acts in con- flict with this act are hereby repealed. Sec. 3—This act shall tak® effect from and after the first Monday in May, 1893. Under the provisions of this act abol- ishing commissions the County Treas- urers made their settlements with the State. There was no outcry or public remonstrance against the law nor any of its provisions. It was as fair to one county as another and just to the whole State at large. It was whispered, how- ever, around the State Capitol that there was some technical error or in- formality in the Senate proceedings on the final enactment of the law and soon attorneys were at work to discover the flaw or technicality by which the va- lidity of the statute could be assailed. It iS said that the law firm of Devlin & Devlin of Sacramento gained posses- sion of the knowledge that only twenty Senators voted for the final passage of the bill, whereas the constitution re- quires twenty-one votes or a majority of all the Senators elected. The Call at this particular time does not propose to go into details concern- ing the entries on the official record of the Senate. The bill was passed ac- cording to the declaration of the pre- siding officer, and it went to the Chief Executive of the State properly certi- fled and received the approval of the Governor. The flaw which the lawyers found was used to excite the greed of counties and lead local officers to be- lieve that a considerable sum of money could be recovered from the State—an amount as large as the several counties would have received in five years under the provisions of the old law. The amount aggregates $1,500,000. In the enterprise to compel the State to reimburse counties Devlin & Devlin of Sacramento were joined by Rodgers, Paterson & Slack of San Francisco. It transpires that contracts were made through Boards of Supervisors with forty-three counties of California. Un- der these contracts the lawyers are to receive on an average 40 per cent of the money collected from the State or withheld from the State In settlement with the State Treasurer. The figures obtained by The Call show that the commissions, calculated on the per- centage of the old law, now aggregate $1,500,000, and the attorneys who dis- covered the flaw and secured the con- tracts are to receive in the aggregate for their enterprise and sagacity nearly $700,000. That the situation is now critical and serious for the State there can be no question. Acting on the advice of the lawyers mentioned the several County Treasurers have refused flatly to make settlement with the State on any other basis than the retention of commis- slons for the collection of the State taxes. Yesterday the Supreme Court denied an original writ of mandate to compel the Controller to settle with the Treasurer of Sutter County. The proceeding in the court was in- stituted to compel the Controller to set- tle on the basis of allowing the Treas- urer of Sutter County to retain the commission for the collection of State taxes, After the court denied the writ compelling settlement on that basis the County Treasurers were advised by the percentage lawyers to make no settle- ment whatever and to refuse to pay money into the State treasury. There- fore no money is going into the State funds. In former years between the 15th and 30th of December about three million dollars was paid into the State treasury and money was available to meet the expenses of the State admin- istration and provide for the support of public institutions. So much for the history of the events leading up to the present complication. Now for the results which are clearly outlined. The sum of money in the State treasury at the present time does not exceed $500,000. When the Board of Examiners meets in a few days and settles the December claims the amount remaining will not exceed $200,000. That sum will not pay the usual expenses for the conduct of the State government for one month. The State government is, therefore, face to face with a serious difficulty. If reputable attorneys and respectable county officals were not concerned in the enterprise to collect money from the State in this fashion