Middletown transcript., 1901-03-30
COLLECTING MORE EVIDENCE
Delaware Again Will Figure in Prosecution
of Mrs. Cordelia Botkin


Attorney-General Ward is collecting
evidence to assist the San Francisco
authorities in the retrial of Mrs. Cor
della Botkin, accused of numbering Mrs.
John P Dunning and Mrs. Joshua D.
Deane, of Dover, by sending poisoned
candy to Mrs. Dunning.
The Delaware witnesses who went to
San Francisco to the first trial probably
will go again, with perhaps the exception
OF Former Congressman John B. Pening-
ton, the father of the murdered women.
He is in poor health. Mr.. Ward has
received the following letter from Tiery
L. Ford, Attorney General of San Fran.
cisco:
State of California,
Office of Attorney General,
San Francisco, March 10Th, 1901.
Hon. Herbert H. Ward, Attorney-Gen-
eral, Dover, Delaware:
DEAR SIR:-When I assumed nv pres
ent office in the early part of January,
1899, found several murder cases pend
ing on appeal in the Supreme Court of
this State, among which was the case of
People VS.. Botkin, with which, assume.
you are somewhat familiar. Among the
cases which l thus found pending ON
appeal was one entitled People vs.. Hoff,
a murder case, wherein the court below
had instructed the jury at considerable
length in respect to eircumstantial evil
dence. The instruction thus given in the
Hoff case was given in identical language
i'll the Botkin case and also in another
celebrated murder case known as the
Brandes case, all of which, as l have
were pending on appeal
when assumed my present office. All
of these cases depended upon circum-
stantial evidence and in each of them
conviction was obtained in the trial
court from which the appeals in ques-
ton were taken. The Hoff case was
first reached by the Supreme Court.
the judgment in which was reversed
and the case remanded for a new trial
because of the giving of the instruction
upon circumstantial evidence above re-
ferred to. This instruction had been
previously given in murder cases in
this State and trial courts were accus-
toned to give it in all cases involv-
ing circumstantial evidence. Knowing
that If the Hoff case were reversed, the
Brandes and Botkin cases would, of ne
eessity, be reversed also, petitioned the
court for rehearing in the Hoff case,
which was granted me. I thereupon re-
argued the case orally before the Supreme
Court and filed written briefs therein.
The court finally adhered to its earlier
ruling by a vote of four to three, our
court consisting of seven justices, fourAof
whom sustained the earlier ruling of the
court, while three of them dissented and
followed the rules which I had presented
In my argument. 1t thus became appar-
ent that the Botkin case as well as the
Brandes case must go back for a new
trial. In the Brands case, there being
no question of jurisdiction, the judgment
was at once reversed upon the authority
Of the Hoff case and the case remanded
for new trial. In the Botkin case, how
ever, it was contended by counsel for ap-
pellant that the State of California had no
Jurisdiction to try the cause. This con-
5ention l combatted and upon this point
alone was the case submitted in the Su-
Dreme Court, which tribunal on the day
before yesterday rendered its decision in
.avor of the Jurisdiction of the State of
California and thereupon remanded the
;ause for new trial. This new trial will
De under the auspices and supervision of
he district attorney of the city of San
Francisco upon whom the law places this
luty. | know the district attorney is an
lous to obtain conviction in the case
md would welcome any assistance you
night render him in the premises. /
write you thus in order that you may be
iiy oPPAAoOd VI UlIC PlCoCAb 6lbudblOu W
he end that you may take such steps as
'ou deem advisable in respect to the mat
er. The address of the district attorney
f this city is; Lewis F. Byington, Dis
rict Attorney, Hall of Justice, San Fran
isco, California
From the enclosed clipping from the
an Francisco Examiner, of March Is,
90l, l suspect that the surviving rela-
ives of the victims of Mrs. Botkin have
aimed an erroneous impression in res
ect to the official conduct of those who
ave been charged with the prosecution
Mrs. Botkin in this State. This i'm
ression, if. it exist, can assure you is
holly and absolutely without founda-
on.
Very truly yours,
TIERY L. FORD,
Acknowledgement of California