Highland recorder. (Monterey, Highland County, Va.) 1877-1972, 1912-01-26

looked black enough. He had been
arrested upon the charge OF having
murdered his wife, and the evidence
against him was as follows:
His wife, vaudeville actress, had
LETT him the preceding spring and had
refused to return TO him. The prin-
ulpal cause for this separation APP
peared to have been his inability 10
support her in comfort, so that she
preferred independence, with the GER
tainty of q moderate income through
her own efforts. to the tir@some rou-
tine o. household duties in the home
Of A man earning a clerks salary.
During tie unreasonable months OF
July and August she had earned a
livelihood by posing for moving pic
ture plays. Sanford had repeatedly
visited her at her apartment to be-
seech Der to return to him. He had
been heard to utter threats in case
she remained obdurate. On The coca
sion OF his last visit previous 10 the
tragedy his wife had been heard to
order him out of the house, and she
had forbidden him to modest her fur
theT.
One week later, at nine o'clock in
the morning, the maid who came in
daily to clean the apartment found
Mrs. Sanford lying dead in a chair
with a deep stab wound Immediately
beneath the right arm. Death had
evidently been almost instantaneous,
fer there was no sign OF a struggle,
and the womans face was as tranquil
ss though she had flung herself down
upon the cushions for a brief rest
after the labors of the day.
The chief witness against Sanford
was the woman who rented the apart
ment adjacent to Mrs. Sanford's. She
testified that she had met Sanford
upon the stairs on the preceding eve
ming, had seen him enter his wife's
apartment, and subsequently heard
the sounds of violent alteration,
after which Sanford left the house in
a condition Of intense excitement.
Two hours or so later she heard him
return and ring Mrs. Sanford's bell.
She heard voices raised in alteration
in the apartment and heard Sanford
again leave, but in a stealthy ana
secreIive manner wholly unlike his
usual method Of departure. She heard
him creep down the stairs and list
ened at the wall, but could make out
no further sound next door. Doubtless
the murder had already been accom-
piished.
The weapon with which the murder
had been committed was found in
contiguous building lot next day. 1t
was a Malay kriss, knife with an
incredibly keen edge, which Mrs. San
ford had owned, and the murder had
been committed with an upward
thrust. Upon the right side OF the
ivory handle, when the blade was held
edge upward, were the blood-prints Of
four gloved fingers.
When called in for the defense I
urged Sanford to plead guilty to man.
slaughter. l told him there was every
reason to hope that he would escape
with a sentence of fifteen or twenty
years. In the first place, the fact that
he had worn gloves, in the second
the fact that the weapon had been
taken from Mrs. Sanford's wall, where
It had hung, clearly indicated absence
Of generalization; while the jury
would show every consideration to
man whose wife had deserted him.
But Sanford obstinately insisted that
he was innocent. He admitted that
he had called on Mrs. Sanford the
evening before the tragedy to induce
her to return to him. She had refused.
he said, and tainted him with the
story of a rival for whose sake she in
tended to obtain divorce.
was only half convinced, In spite
of the vehemence of Sanford's denial.
I have heard criminals assert their
innocence most convincingly, only to
admit their guilt after conviction.
Have you any theory as to who
the murderer was?" I asked.
1.-The man she tainted me about"
cried Sanford. "He had been poster
ing her for weeks to divorce me and
marry him, had threatened her with
death unless she consented. She pre-
tended to me that she intended TO
comply; but | know in my heart that
she always loved me. If l had only
earned more money she would have
come back to me. Do you think l
should have hung round her for
months without some reasonable hope?
| tell you she hated that fellow; she
just tried to play each of US off
against the other"
Sanford insisted that this man had
been the second visitor on the night
of the murder, and had slain Mrs.
Sanford in jealous rage when she
finally refused to marry him. But he
had never seen him and knew nothing
OF his identity
That was all had to go upon. The
woman in the apartment next to Mrs.
Sanfords admitted that she had not
actually seen Sanford return on the
night of the murder. She was con.
WINGED, however, that the second Wis
itor was he. She had no reason for
this conviction, but she was all the
more certain of It,
I was willing to believe that San.
ford had had a rival for Mrs. San.
ford's affections, and that he had fire..
Quently visited the woman. Probably
she had been holding off both men
until she could decide to which one it
would prove more profitable to attach