The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1896-09-16
ANOTHER CHANCE
FOR ". A. SANDERS
The Supreme Court Grants
His Plea for a New
Trial.
OLD MYSTERY REVIVED.
No Explanation of the Strange
Disappearance of William
Wootton.
THE VERDICT Is SET ASIDE.
The Convicted Man Will Have an OPP.
portunity to Clear His Name
From Shame.
THE VERDICT IS SET ASIDE.

w. A. Sanders, whose connection with
the Wootton case led to his conviction for
forgery about year ago, has been granted
another chance to prove his innocence.
Yesterday the Supreme Court allowed
him new trial, thus bringing once more
to public notice one of the most mysteri-
Gus murder cases in the history of the
State.
Sanders is now man of go years, and
has long been prominent in educational
circles, having been very successful as a
public schoolteacher. in Fresno where
he lived with his family, resided William
Wootton, wealthy ranch-owner. with
whom Sanders was very friendly. In 1894
Sanders suggested to Wootton that he
should sell his large farm. Wootton acqui-
esced, ana it was arranged that the prop
erty should be sold to two friends of Sand
ers' named, respectively, Graves and
500, 900 was paid to Sanders on the LIST of
February, 1894.
On the same day Wootton disappeared
and nothing has been heard of him since
Some time after Wootton's disappear
ance Sanders pres ented and cashed a check
for $l40O, purport ing to have been drawn
by Wootton against the firm of Kutna,
Goldstein & Co. Meanwhile the mysteri-
Gus absence of Wootton had occasioned
much talk, and eventually Sanders was
accus ed of making away with him. The
case was tr led, but it was found impossi-
BILE 10 fix the guilt OF murder upon San
ders. He was, however convicted of forg-
in Wootton's name TO The check.
The men Graves and Knausch were
sought high and low, but could not be
found; and it was surmised that the names
were fl ctitious. Sanders, in disgrace and
under the shadow of damping and terri
BILE, though improved, accusation OF muir
der, was sent into confinement as con-
vicied forger.
In granting the motion for new trial
the Supreme Court says:
1t was incumbent upon the prosecution to
show that the instrument purporting to have
been executed by William WooIton was in fact
a forgery. One mode by which they undertook
to establish this was by evidence that Wootton
was dead before the day upon which the in
sirument bore dare. True this would not con-
clusiyely establish the false character OF the
draft, for q man might postdate such N instru-
ment. Nevertheless, 1T would be evidence
tending 10 show its false character. Again, it
was proper part of the case of the prosecution
to show that the defendant uttered and passed
the instrument, knowing it to be forged, and,
If the prosecution could establish to the salts
fore the day upon which the instrument bore
date, and that Sanders knew of his death, il
would unques tionably be strong evidence tend
ing to show that he knowingly passed forged
instrument.
But the prosecution having the Hndoubted
right to prove these things was not to be de-
prived OF that right merely because the prov
ing of the death of Wootton involved the evil
dence OF the crime of murder against the
defendant. The prosecution, in proving the
death OF Wootton, was entitled TO show the
manner of mis- death, and ii, in so showing it
was made to appear that he had been fouliy
dealt with, and had come to his end at the
hands OF the defendant, it was not for that
reason to be excluded from the consideration
OF the jury. The evidence was thus not intro
duced 10 besmirch the defendant or cast I'M
| warranted suspicion upon him. 1t was neces-
sarily introduced in proof of a material fact,
which it was competent for the prosecution to
show that Wootton was dead was admissible,
even though IL tended to show that he was
murdered by Sanders.
Under the circums tances and under the ma
ture of the evidence which had been brought
to bear against Sanders he should have been
allowed the fullest latitude in the matter
The court, however, under objections from
the prosecution, refused TO admit the evidence
of Traver, and left such fragments OF it as were
admitted in eviscerated and well nigh un--
Ineligible condition. This was a hardship
and in jury to the defendant. The Importance
to the defendant Sanders of evidence, even the
slightest, showing tending TO show that
after that time Wo0tton was seen in the COM
pany presumably OF the two men whom the
prosecution claims to be myths is manifest,