エピソード

  • 08 - Candy From a Stranger: The Cordelia Botkin Case of 1898.

    08 - Candy From a Stranger: The Cordelia Botkin Case of 1898.
    2026/05/06
    Candy From a Stranger: The Cordelia Botkin Case of 1898. On February 12, 1891, John P. Dunning, who became famous as a war correspondent, married Miss Mary Pennington, daughter of ex-Congressman John Pennington, in Dover, Delaware, and the couple came to San Francisco to reside. The next year a little daughter was born. The family then moved to 2529 California Street, and while living at this address, Dunning took a stroll in Golden Gate Park one afternoon and flirted with a woman sitting on a bench. They entered into a conversation, during which the woman said her name was “Curtis,” and that her husband was in England. After they became more familiar the woman admitted that she was the wife of Welcome A. Botkin, whom she married in Kansas City on September 26, 1872, and that she had a grown son named Beverly. Her maiden name was Cordelia Brown, and the town of Brownsville, Nebraska, was named after her father. Botkin was for many years connected with the Missouri Valley Bank in Kansas City, but lived in Stockton, California, with his son, Beverly, at the time his wife met Dunning. While his wife remained in San Francisco Dunning met Mrs. Botkin clandestinely, but Mrs. Dunning took her baby to her father’s home in Dover, Delaware, and thereafter her husband and Mrs. Botkin were constant companions at the races and cafes. Mrs. Botkin moved to 927 Geary Street and Dunning took a room in the same building. In the course of conversation he told Mrs. Botkin that his wife was passionately fond of candy and that she had a very dear friend in San Francisco named Mrs. Corbaley. On March 8, 1898, Dunning accepted a position as war correspondent with the Associated Press, which made it necessary for him to depart immediately for Porto Rico. When he told Mrs. Botkin his plans, she pleaded with him to remain with her. He turned a deaf ear to her pleadings and told her bluntly that he would never return to San Francisco. She accompanied him across the bay and wept bitterly when they parted. On August 9, 1898, a small package arrived in Dover, Delaware, addressed to Mrs. John P. Dunning. That package was placed in the mail box belonging to her father, and was called for by Mr. Pennington’s little grandson and taken home. The family consisted of Mr. and Mrs. Pennington, their two daughters, Mrs. Dunning and Mrs. Joshua Deane ; their son-in-law, Mr. Deane, and the two little children of Mr. and Mrs. Deane. After supper the family repaired to the veranda, and Mrs. Dunning opened the package, which proved to be a fancy candy box containing a handkerchief, chocolate creams and a small slip of paper on which were the following words: “With love to yourself and baby.—Mrs. C.” Mrs. Dunning could not imagine who had sent the package, but being a noble woman, with friends galore, she did not suspect that she had an enemy in the world, and therefore her suspicion was not aroused. Mrs. Dunning and Mrs. Deane and the latter’s two children partook of the candy, as did also two young ladies, Miss Millington and Miss Bateman, who chanced to pass the Pennington residence while the family were seated on the veranda. During that night all who partook of the candy were taken with retching pains in the stomach and vomited freely. All recovered with the exception of Mrs. Dunning, who died on August 12, and Mrs. Deane, who died on August 11. Autopsies disclosed the fact that these ladies died from arsenic poisoning. Mr. Pennington examined the handwriting on the box and on the slip of paper and discovered that it corresponded with the handwriting of an unknown person who had written an anonymous communication from San Francisco to Mrs. Dunning many months previously, in which it was alleged that Mr. Dunning was on intimate terms with a woman in San Francisco. Dr. Wood, a chemist, examined the candy which had not been eaten, and discovered a large amount of arsenic present. John P. Dunning was advised by telegraph of what had transpired and he proceeded at once to Dover. He immediately recognized the handwriting as that of Mrs. Botkin and recalled his remark to her regarding his wife’s fondness for candy, and also that his wife had a friend in San Francisco named Mrs. Corbaly, which accounted for the initial “C.” signed to the note. Detective B. J. McVey was sent to San Francisco with the candy, handkerchief, candy box and the note found in the box. Chief of Police I. W. Lees took charge of the case. Mrs. Botkin was located in Stockton, Cal., where she was living with her husband and son. Detective Ed. Gibson brought her to San Francisco, and in a few days an overwhelming amount of circumstantial evidence was piled up against her. She was positively identified by Miss Sylvia Heney and Miss Kittie Dittmer as the woman who, on July 31, bought candy in the candy store of George Haas under the Phelan block on Market Street. Miss Heney furthermore swore that this woman requested that the candy be placed in...
    続きを読む 一部表示
    13 分
  • 07 - The Lady and The Troll, the Murder of Mrs. Mary Clute, San Francisco, 1897.

    07 - The Lady and The Troll, the Murder of Mrs. Mary Clute, San Francisco, 1897.
    2026/05/06
    The Lady and The Troll, the Murder of Mrs. Mary Clute, San Francisco, 1897. Albert Frederick George Vereneseneckockockhoff (Alias Albert Hoff), Murderer of Mrs. Mary Clute. In the latter part of 1897, Mrs. Mary Clute, wife of a prominent commercial traveler, resided at 230 Page Street, San Francisco. She was a lady of attractive appearance and had a host of friends because of her kindly disposition. Albert F. G. Vereneseneckockockhoff, commonly known as “Hoff,” was a short, chunky, middle-aged German, with a heavy, ill-kept beard and a coarse, brutal face, which took on a fiendish expression when he was angered. He resided at the Lindell House, No. 262 Sixth Street, and made a living by working as a handy man about different homes. On December 12, 1897, Mrs. Clute decided to move from 230 Page Street to 803 Guerrero Street. Having previously employed Hoff to do some upholstering, she sent a note to the Lindell House, requesting him to call the next day. She then went to a store to purchase some carpet lining, but the upholsterer informed her that he would not sell her the lining unless he was given the work of laying the carpet. This was the work she intended to give to Hoff, but having no assurance that he would respond promptly, she accepted the upholsterer’s terms. Hoff called on her the next morning, and she explained her predicament and expressed regret that she had inconvenienced him. Hoff’s manner plainly indicated his displeasure, but to compensate him for his loss of time, Mrs. Cute told him to come the next afternoon and she would give him a job hanging her pictures. The next day, December 15, Hoff called at 803 Guerrero Street shortly after noon, but as Mrs. Cute was not at the house, he rang the door bell of the lower flat and one of the occupants, Mrs. L. A. Legg, came to the door. Hoff announced his business and made inquiry as to the whereabouts of Mrs. Clute. Upon learning that she was not in, he proceeded to 230 Page Street, arriving about 4 p. m. There he met Mrs. Clute who informed him that she was exceedingly sorry, but her expressman had disappointed her, and that she would surely be moved the next day, and requested Hoff to call at 803 Guerrero Street at I p. m. December 16. At this time Hoff was slightly intoxicated; his breath was foul; his whiskers were besmeared with liquor, and he was in an ugly mood because of his loss of time. Mrs. Clute then said to Mrs. Uchold, a neighbor, in the presence of Hoff, that she was going over to her new home, and left Hoff talking with Mrs. Uchold regarding some work the latter contemplated giving him. When they had finished their conversation, Hoff announced that he was going to see Mrs. Clute, to which Mrs. Uchold replied: “Why are you going there, she does not want you until tomorrow?” Hoff apparently disregarded this remark, and proceeded to 803 Guerrero Street. A few moments after 4 p. m., Mrs. Legg, who lived in the flat below Mrs. Clute’s new home, saw this man return, ring Mrs. Clute’s bell and go upstairs. At this time Mrs. Clute was in her new flat with Jos. Foley, who was laying the carpets. At 4:45 p. m. Foley left and at that time Hoff was walking aimlessly about the flat while Mrs. Clute was engaged with some housework. Mrs. Legg’s aged father-in-law resided with her and her husband in the lower flat, and about 5 p. m. he rushed into the kitchen and exclaimed excitedly to his daughter-in-law, who was preparing dinner: “I thought I heard you scream.” They listened a second and then they heard something heavy fall in the upper flat. Mrs. Legg started upstairs and seeing Hoff passing from one room to another called out: “What is the matter up there ?” Hoff made no reply and the lady, becoming alarmed, returned to her father-in-law. Presently they saw Hoff sneak away from the house with a small bag on his shoulder, in which he carried his tools. They called out to him to learn the cause of the disturbance upstairs, but he pretended not to hear them and hurried away. An investigation was then instituted and Mrs. Clute’s horribly mutilated body was found in a back room. Her head was lying in a pool of blood; her face was beaten beyond recognition; there were eight different fractures of the skull and near the body was found a railroad coupling pin covered with blood. Mrs. Clute wore valuable jewelry and also had a well-filled purse with her at the time she was killed. As none of these valuables were taken the motive for the crime has never been proven, although it is probable that Mrs. Legg’s unexpected appearance on the scene caused the murderer to abandon his original plans and consider nothing but the possibility of being discovered. The next day the papers devoted considerable space to this crime and dwelt at length on Mrs. Legg’s observations. Hoff read this, and realizing that there would be no difficulty in locating him, he called on Police Chief Lees and trembling with ...
    続きを読む 一部表示
    8 分
  • 06 - Adolph Luetgert and His Dissolving Wife, 1897.

    06 - Adolph Luetgert and His Dissolving Wife, 1897.
    2026/05/04
    Adolph Luetgert and His Dissolving Wife, 1897. On May 1, Mrs. Luetgert suddenly disappeared, but her husband was apparently unconcerned regarding her absence and advanced the theory that she had committed suicide because of his failure in business. On May 4, Deidrich Bicknesse, Mrs. Luetgert’s brother, called to see her, and Luetgert informed him that she had been missing for three days, but admitted that he had not notified the police of the singular incident nor had he taken any steps to locate her. Bicknesse, observing Luetgert’s utter indifference, had the police notified and Captain Herman Schuettler instituted an investigation. The press gave much publicity to the mysterious disappearance and the police began a general search, even going to the extent of dragging the river for a considerable distance, but nothing was discovered. Finally Captain Schuettler decided to confine his investigation to the factory in general but to a large vat therein in particular, and a rapid solution of the mystery followed. In the sediment in the bottom of the vat, two gold rings, one having the initials “L. L.” engraved inside, a tooth, and two corset steels were found. The rings were positively identified as the property of Mrs. Louise Luetgert, and in the yard where the bones from the animals were thrown, a part of a skull and other pieces of human bones were found. It was learned that during the period between May 2 and May 17 Luetgert made many efforts to gain an entrance to the factory, but was always refused admission by the sheriff’s deputies who were in charge. On May 18, Luetgert was arrested and four days later was indicted by the grand jury. He attempted to gain his freedom on a writ of habeas corpus but failed. On August 7, the prosecution obtained a corpse, and placing it in the identical vat where Mrs. Luetgert’s body was destroyed, boiled it in caustic potash for two hours. At the expiration of that time, nothing remained of the fleshy parts of the body but a fluid and all of the bones, except the larger ones, were completely destroyed. This proved that their theory was correct. On August 24, Luetgert’s trial began before Judge Tuthill. The attorney for Luetgert claimed that he had also made a test with a corpse, but that the boiling process did not dissolve it. The contention of the defense was that no crime had been committed and that Mrs. Luetgert was not dead, but was remaining in seclusion. A letter was received by Alderman Schlake signed by “Loisa Luetgert,” in which the missing woman was represented as saying that she was then living with friends in Chicago, but it was shown that the handwriting in no manner resembled that of the missing woman and the missive was evidently sent for the purpose of con¬fusing the authorities. Nicholas Faber and Emma and Gottliebe Schimpke testified that they saw Luetgert enter his factory about 10 p. m. on the night of May 1 with a woman about the size of Mrs. Luetgert. Frank Bialk, a watchman in the factory, which had been shut down since the failure, testified that on this night, Luetgert instructed him to bring down two barrels of caustic potash and place them in the boiler room, and that Luetgert then poured the contents of both barrels in one of the vats. The watchman was instructed to keep up steam all night and at 10 p. m. he was sent by Luetgert to the drug store after some nerve medicine. When he returned, Luetgert was in the room where the vats were located and had the door locked. Bialk furthermore testified that he resided at the home of Police Officer Klinger and that on May 6 Luetgert called on him. After concealing the officer under the bed in Bialk’s room, Luetgert was admitted to the room and in suppressed excitement asked if the officers had discovered anything at the factory. Bialk answered “No,” and Luetgert, with a show of relief, remarked: “That’s good.” He then admonished the watchman to tell the police nothing and promised that when the factory re-opened, good positions would be provided for Bialk and his son. Frank Odorfsky, an employee of the factory, who assisted Luetgert to put the caustic potash in the vat; testified that in all his experience in the factory he had never seen caustic potash used there before. Mrs. Agatha Tosch, whose husband conducted a saloon opposite the factory, testified that she saw smoke coming from the factory chimney on the night of May 1, although the factory was supposed to have been shut down at the time. She also stated that Luetgert visited her on the following day and requested her to say nothing about the smoke as it would get him in trouble. Chas. Hengst stated that he was passing the factory about 10 p. m. on May 1, and heard a noise similar to that made by a person screaming. Chemist Carl Voelker testified that there was no occasion for caustic potash in a sausage factory. Mrs. Christina Feldt, a widow with whom the ...
    続きを読む 一部表示
    8 分
  • 05 - The Knight Falls: The Murder of Mrs. Langfeldt, 1896, San Francisco.

    05 - The Knight Falls: The Murder of Mrs. Langfeldt, 1896, San Francisco.
    2026/05/04
    The Knight Falls: The Murder of Mrs. Langfeldt, 1896, San Francisco. There is a great link to an 1896 article from The San Francisco Call about the case at the end of the article. San Francisco, 1896. Joseph Blanther was born in Rankerburg Steirmart, Austria, in 1859. When nineteen years of age he was made a Lieutenant in the Austrian army, and a few months later, on December 12, 1878, was knighted and decorated by Emperor Franz Josef for distinguished services in battle. Because of some peculiar transaction he retired from the army and left his native land. He arrived in San Francisco on February 2, 1896, and took up lodgings at the residence of Mr. Hogan, at 222 Haight Street. He was a liberal spender among the fair-weather friends he chanced to meet, and delighted to maintain a show of wealth. He had been living at the Hogan residence only a short while when he borrowed $15 from Miss Hogan, at the same time obtaining $9.70 from a Mrs. Gilbert, who lived in the same house. For security he gave both ladies worthless checks on the Columbia Bank. About this time he met Mr. C. H. Tebbs, a newspaper artist. Blanther, who had done some writing for Harper’s, and the Argonaut, and Tebbs, became quite friendly, and Blanther borrowed Tebbs’ camera. When the artist asked him to return it, Blanther made so many excuses that the Harry Morse Detective Agency was finally employed to recover it. Captain Cullenden was assigned to the case, and obtained a confession from Blanther to the effect that he had pawned the camera to a broker on Kearney Street, where it was subsequently recovered. As Blanther claimed that he was actually starving and was forced to raise the money, Tebbs declined to prosecute him. In 1896 an aged and decrepit old lady named Mrs. Philipini Langfeldt occupied a room at the residence of Dr. Kleineburg, at 1225 Geary Street. She, like Blanther, also loved to create the impression that she possessed much wealth, and almost constantly wore five very valuable rings set with diamonds and pearls. Blanther remained at the Hogan home but a short time, and after a brief trip to Portland took up his residence at the home of the widow of Detective James Handley, at 828 Geary Street, four blocks from the Langfeldt home. He learned of the “wealthy” old Langfeldt lady and obtained an introduction. Notwithstanding the great differences in their ages, he paid her marked attention and made a great display of his decorations, never missing an opportunity to tell of his hairbreadth escapes on the bloody battlefield, and incidentally to refer to the honors bestowed upon him by the Emperor. On Friday, May 15, 1896, Mrs. Langfeldt told Mrs. Kleineburg that she expected Mr. Blanther to call that evening. While no one saw Blanther enter the house, different members of the household heard some man laughing and talking with Mrs. Langfeldt in her apartments. This person arrived about 9 p. m., and Dr. Kleineburg heard him leave at 11:10 p.m. At 9 a. m. on the following morning a domestic servant in the house named Susie Miller took a cup of coffee to Mrs. Langfeldt’s room, but as she received no response to her knocks at the door she notified Dr. Kleineburg. Officer Thomas Atchison was called and he broke in the door. In the middle of the floor was the body of the old lady, her head almost severed from the body, evidently by a razor. As might be imagined, everything near the body was saturated with blood. Captain of Detectives Lees was called and he found drops of blood in remote corners of the room, which convinced him that the assassin had probably cut one of his hands in cutting the old lady’s throat. The five rings which she wore were stripped from her fingers, and the apartments were rifled. Suspicion at once fell on Blanther. Mrs. Handley, his landlady, was visited, and she stated that Blanther arrived home on the preceding evening at 11:20, ten minutes after Dr. Kleineburg heard Mrs. Langfeldt’s visitor leave. She stated that he went to the bathroom, and while she heard him leave the house on the following morning at 6 o’clock, an unusually early hour, he did not sleep in his bed during the night. J. E. Lynch, a roomer in the same house, stated that he saw Blanther leave the bathroom about 11:30 on the preceding night, just as he entered it, and noticing crimsoned water in the bottom and on the sides of the basin he concluded that Blanther had a “nose bleed” or had cut his hand. Architect George Dodge came forward and made a statement substantially as follows: “I became acquainted with Blanther when he resided at Mr. Hogan’s home on Haight Street. I saw him on Friday evening, the night of the murder, and he was despondent. He informed me that he had just pawned his overcoat, and if he did not get some money somewhere he would commit suicide. “When he left me at 8:15 p. m. he told me that he was going to visit a friend on Geary Street. “On the ...
    続きを読む 一部表示
    13 分
  • 04 - Psycho-Sexual Killer Theodore Durrant, 1895, part 2.

    04 - Psycho-Sexual Killer Theodore Durrant, 1895, part 2.
    2026/05/04
    Psycho-Sexual Killer Theodore Durrant, 1895, part 2. .....This caused a search to be made for Durrant at his home, but it was learned that early on the morning of the discovery of Minnie Williams’ body, he had left the city with the Signal Corps of the State Militia. A search was made of his clothing in his room, and Minnie Williams’ purse was found in his overcoat. Detective A. Anthony was detailed to trail Durrant and arrest him, and on Sunday, April 14, Anthony and Constable Palmer arrested him near Walnut Creek, notwithstanding the indignant protest made by Lieutenant Perkins against this “outrageous accusation.” While Anthony was engaged in apprehending Durrant, the remainder of the detective force began a systematic search of the church, with the result that they found even a more blood-curdling sight in the belfry than that beheld by the ladies in the library. This belfry was in semi-darkness, but enough light entered for the detectives to behold what appeared like a marble carving of an absolutely nude girl lying on the floor, with a block of wood under her head. She was laid out on her back after death with her hands carefully crossed over her breast, in a position similar to that of bodies used by medical students in the dissecting room. A far more thorough search was necessary to locate her clothes and school-books, but they were eventually found poked in between the studs and the lath and plaster of the building. Blanche Lamont’s name appeared in the books. An autopsy disclosed the fact that she died from strangulation but decomposition had reached such a state that it was impossible to determine if an outrage had been committed. While the body was as white as marble as it lay in the cool belfry, when it was removed to the body of the church, where the air was much warmer, it turned almost jet black. Notwithstanding the overwhelming amount of evidence, which proved conclusively that Durrant accompanied Miss Lamont from the school to Emanuel Baptist Church, he denied having seen her that day and attempted to prove an alibi by swearing that he was at Cooper Medical College at the time it was alleged he was in the very act of murdering this girl. While it is true that the records showed that some one answered his name at roll call at the conclusion of Dr. Cheney’s lecture, it was shown that it was customary for the students to answer for each other in case of absence, and no one would swear that Durrant was present at this lecture. As proof that he was not present, it was shown that several days afterward he persuaded a fellow student, Mr. Glaser, to give him the notes that he, Glaser, had taken at the lecture. As soon as the finger of suspicion was pointed toward Durrant, information poured in to Captain Lees, proving that the prisoner was a degenerate of the most depraved class. For obvious reasons, names cannot be given of young ladies to whom he made the most disgusting propositions, and the wonder of it is that he was not killed, or at ,least exposed before. But in most instances the nature of his insults were such that the young ladies offended feared to inform their relatives, lest they would take the law in their own hands. One young lady told her mother that some time previous to these murders, Durrant had inveigled her into this same library and excusing himself for a moment, returned stark naked and she ran screaming from the church. Although Minnie Williams was frightfully butchered and the room resembled a slaughter-house, not one drop of blood could be found on Durrant’s clothes, and there is no doubt but that he was naked when he committed this crime. He probably strangled Blanche Lamont in the library and then dragged her body up to the belfry, head first. That this was the manner in which he got her body to the place where it was found was proven by the finding of hairs from her head which caught in splinters on the steps. Durrant also attempted to inveigle Miss Lucille Turner into this library for the purpose of making a “physical examination.” The preliminary examination of Durrant began before Police Judge Charles Conlon on April 22, 1895. He was de-fended by General John Dickenson, and later by Eugene Duprey. On May 22 he was held to answer before the Superior Court for both murders. Captain Lees and District Attorney William Barnes decided to try him for the murder of Blanche Lamont, as that appeared at the time to be the strongest case, but subsequently additional evidence was gathered which made the Minnie Williams case even stronger than the one on which he was tried. His trial began before Judge Murphy on July 22, 1895, and over one month was occupied in selecting a jury, during which time over one thousand prospective jurors appeared in court. During the trial the Alcazar Theater Company produced a play called the “Criminal of the Century,” which was a dramatization of the Durrant murders. This was produced in ...
    続きを読む 一部表示
    8 分
  • 03 - Psycho-Sexual Killer Theodore Durrant, 1895, part 1.

    03 - Psycho-Sexual Killer Theodore Durrant, 1895, part 1.
    2026/05/04
    Psycho-Sexual Killer Theodore Durrant, 1895, part 1. Theodore Durrant was born in Toronto, Canada, in 1871, and while a child came to San Francisco with his parents, who gave him a good education. In 1895 he was a medical student at Cooper Medical College. He pretended to be a devout Christian and was one of the most active members of Emanuel Baptist Church, which is located on Bartlett, near Twenty-Third Street. The younger members of this church organized a society for social purposes, and Durrant was elected Secretary, and was also a Superintendent in the Sunday-school. In 1894 a most estimable young lady, named Blanche Lamont, left her home in Dillon, Mont., because of poor health and came to San Francisco to continue her studies for the purpose of eventually following the vocation of a school-teacher. She made her home with her uncle and aunt, Mr. and Mrs. C. G. Noble, at 209 Twenty-First Street, where her sister, Maud, also resided. Blanche was a very religious girl and seldom went to places of amusement, but when she did she was usually accompanied by her relatives. She always attended the Emanuel Baptist Church and was a member of the Christian Endeavor, where she was a great favorite, because of her lovable disposition and good qualities. On the morning of April 3, 1895, Miss Lamont left home as usual to attend the Boys’ High School, in which building she was taking a course at that time. While en route to this school she was accompanied by Durrant, who, after leaving her, went to the Cooper Medical College. After Miss Lamont finished her studies at this school she repaired to the Normal School on Powell Street, between Clay and Sacramento, where she was to take instructions in cooking, between 2 and 3 p. m. Shortly after 2 o’clock Durrant appeared in front of this school and waited impatiently until nearly 3 p. m., when Miss Lamont came out of the building accompanied by a classmate named Minnie Edwards. Durrant approached and engaged Miss Lamont in conversation. Miss Edwards continued to the corner and got inside of the next southbound Powell street car and saw Durrant and Miss Lamont take seats on the dummy, Miss Lamont having her school books with her. Two other classmates of Miss Lamont, Miss Lanagan and Miss Pleasant, who were walking home, also saw her sitting on the dummy with Durrant. On this day some street-pavers were re-laying some old-fashioned paving at Twenty-Second and Bartlett Streets, and as Attorney Martin Quinlan was passing this place curiosity prompted him to stop and watch the re-laying of this almost obsolete style of paving. While so doing, Theodore Durrant, whom he knew well, passed with a young lady of the same general appearance of Miss Lamont. They were then walking in the direction of the Emanuel Baptist Church, a few hundred feet distant. Quinlan fixed the time as about 4:15 p. m., because of an appointment he was about to keep with a Mr. Clark on Mission street. Diagonally across the street from this church, at 124 Bartlett Street, lived a Mrs. Leake, who had a married daughter named Mrs. Maguire, whose home was in San Mateo. On this date the daughter came to San Francisco, called on her mother and then went downtown to do some shopping, informing her mother that she would be back in the early afternoon. As it was growing late the mother became uneasy about her daughter and sat in the window eagerly awaiting her return. At seventeen minutes past four she looked at the clock and then returned to the window, but instead of seeing her daughter approach she saw Durrant, whom she knew well as a member of her church, and a young lady of Miss Lamont’s general appearance walk up to the church, where Durrant opened the side gate and followed the young lady inside. This was the last seen of Blanche Lamont. About 5 p. m. George King, the church organist, came to the church for the purpose of practicing for the next service. He had hardly begun his practice when Durrant opened the door leading down from the belfry. Durrant and King had been close friends, and King stated that when Durrant opened this door he was very pale, nervous and weak and was without a coat and hat. He stated that Durrant explained his weakened condition by saying that he had been up near the roof, trying to locate a leak in the gaspipe and had been overcome by gas. King ran to a drug store near Valencia and Twenty-Second Streets and returned with a bottle of bromo-seltzer, which Durrant drank. When he claimed that he had recovered, King asked him to assist in carrying a small organ from the auditorium upstairs down to the main floor. Durrant consented, but King stated that he detected no odor of gas whatever while upstairs, and furthermore that all the gas fixtures had been inspected by plumbers just previous to this time and were in good condition. Shortly after removing the organ the two men left the church, Durrant walking to King’s home with him, although Durrant’...
    続きを読む 一部表示
    9 分
  • 02 - The Sensational Murder of Alexander Crittenden by his Mistress, Laura D. Fair, 1870.

    02 - The Sensational Murder of Alexander Crittenden by his Mistress, Laura D. Fair, 1870.
    2026/05/04
    The Sensational Murder of Alexander Crittenden by his Mistress, Laura D. Fair, 1870.
    Alexander Crittenden was born in Lexington, Ky., on, January 14, 1816. Andrew Jackson was a close friend of his family, and it was through Jackson’s influence that Alexander was sent to West Point. He graduated from this military college with Sherman and remained in the army about one year. At the age of twenty-two he married and went to Texas, where he was admitted to the bar. In 1852 he came to San Francisco and associated himself with S. M. Wilson. Under the firm name of Crittenden & Wilson, they became one of the most prominent law firms in San Francisco.
    Laura D. Fair was a native of Mississippi, and at the age of sixteen she married a man named Stone, who died about one year afterward. She then married a Thomas Gracien of New Orleans, but a divorce was obtained six months afterward. In 1859 she married Colonel W. B. Fair, who was at that time Sheriff of Shasta County, California, but who subsequently moved to San Francisco with his wife. Owing to family troubles he committed suicide in December, 1861. After the death of her husband, Mrs. Fair conducted the Tahoe House in Virginia City.
    During the war her sympathies were with the South to such an extent that she took a shot at a Northern soldier, but as her aim was very bad she was never punished for her action. On another occasion she shot a man at the Russ House in San Francisco, whom she claimed had made a disparaging remark concerning her, but again her aim was bad and again she escaped prosecution.
    Mrs. Fair had some ability as an actress and appeared at the Metropolitan Theatre in Sacramento on March 5, 1863, as Lady Teazle in the “School for Scandal.” In August, 1870, a young man named Jesse Snyder married her, but on October 8 of the same year they were divorced.
    In September, 1870, Crittenden sent his wife and seven children East for a pleasure trip, and on the afternoon of November 3 he went to Oakland to greet them on their return. He met his family at the Oakland pier and accompanied them aboard the ferry El Capitan. From the time of the family reunion, Mr. Crittenden’s son, Parker, noticed a woman dressed in black and heavily veiled, who seemed to be watching their actions very closely, and when the family were seated on the boat she hurried toward them and suddenly whipping out a pistol, shot Crittenden Senior in the chest. The wounded man fell unconscious and the woman hurried away and took a seat, but Captain Kentzel of the Harbor Police, who was on the boat at the time, disarmed her and placed her under arrest. It was subsequently learned that she was Mrs. Laura D. Fair. Immediately after being arrested she began to act in a peculiar manner, and when a stimulant was handed to her in a glass of water, she bit a piece out of the glass.
    At 6 p. m., November 5, Crittenden died, and on the day of his funeral the Federal, State and municipal courts adjourned. His funeral was one of the largest ever held in San Francisco up to that time.
    Mrs. Fair was charged with murder, and during the trial, which occurred in San Francisco, she testified that she and Crittenden had been intimate for seven years past. The defense offered was that Crittenden’s perfidities had wrought havoc with Mrs. Fair’s mind and that she was in a blind frenzy when she shot him.
    On April 26, 1871, the jury after a short deliberation brought in a verdict of guilty of murder, and on June 3, 1871, Mrs. Fair was sentenced to be hanged on July 28.
    On July 11 the Supreme Court granted her a stay of execution and finally granted her a new trial, at which she was acquitted, because of her attorney’s plea to the jury that the defendant was a victim of emotional insanity.
    For many years after her acquittal Mrs. Fair made a living as a book agent in San Francisco.


    This episode includes AI-generated content.
    続きを読む 一部表示
    4 分
  • 01 - Dying for Survival on the SS William Brown, Atlantic Ocean, 1841.

    01 - Dying for Survival on the SS William Brown, Atlantic Ocean, 1841.
    2026/05/04
    Dying for Survival on the SS William Brown, Atlantic Ocean, 1841. On March 13, 1841, the American ship William Brown left Liverpool for Philadelphia. In addition to a large cargo, the vessel carried sixty-five passengers and a crew of seventeen men. At 10 p. m. on Monday, April 19, when two hundred and fifty miles from Cape Race, Newfoundland, the vessel struck an iceberg and began to fill so rapidly that it was evident she would soon go down. The “long boat” and “jolly boat” were then cleared away and lowered. The captain, second mate, seven of the crew and one passenger entered the jolly boat, and the first mate, thirty-two passengers and the remainder of the crew entered the long boat. Thirty-one passengers were left on the ship, and they all begged the captain and mate to take them into the lifeboats, but the first mate replied: “Poor souls, you’re only going down a short time before we do.” One hour later the ship went to the bottom and the thirty-one passengers perished. The two lifeboats remained together during the night, but at daybreak the captain decided to take his boat in another direction, but before leaving the long boat he instructed all on board to obey the first mate’s orders. The first mate then informed the captain that his boat was leaking badly, and that it would soon be necessary to cast lots to determine who should be thrown overboard. The captain replied: “Let that be the last resort.” During Tuesday [April 20, 1841] the rain came down in torrents. The long boat was in constant danger of being struck by floating ice. The sea grew heavier and the passengers, many of whom were attired in their nightclothes, suffered intensely from the cold weather. The men took turns at rowing and baling out the boat, while the terror-stricken women huddled together in an effort to keep warm. At 10 o’clock Tuesday night the men were completely exhausted from exposure, exertion and lack of nourishment. Finally the mate, who observed that the boat was slowly filling with water, cried out in despair: “This work won’t do. Help me, God! Men, go to work, the boat is sinking.” The women passengers became hysterical and many were down on their knees offering up prayers. The first mate then said: “Men, you must go to work or we shall all perish.” They “went to work” and threw fourteen passengers overboard, but the crew was not molested. The first four men to be thrown overboard were named Riley, Duffy, Charles Conlin and Frank Askin. The latter’s two sisters were in the boat, and they pleaded for their brother’s life, but all in vain. The next two to go overboard were Askin’s sisters, but the evidence is conflicting as to whether they were thrown overboard or whether their sacrifice was an act of self-devotion to their brother. It was admitted that when Sailor Holmes seized their brother, the sisters expressed a wish to follow him. Askin struggled violently, and the fact that the boat was not upset in the struggle was used against Holmes afterward to prove the improbability of its capsizing. The “work” continued until fourteen men were forced into a watery grave. Many asked for and were granted time to offer up a prayer before being cast into the sea. On Wednesday morning the weather cleared up and the ship Crescent was sighted by the occupants of the long boat. The shipwrecked people were rescued and brought to Philadelphia. After six days of indescribable suffering, the captain and his party were picked up by a French fishing boat. When some of the passengers finally reached their destination of Philadelphia, they filed a complaint with the District Attorney. Sailor Alexander Holmes was the only crewman to be found in the city, so he was the only one charged. He was accused of murdering Frank Askin. A grand jury refused to indict him on that charge, so it was reduced to manslaughter. Holmes was prosecuted under an act of April 30, 1790, which provided: “Any seaman who shall commit manslaughter upon the high seas, on conviction shall be imprisoned not exceeding three years and a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars.” Holmes was charged with the unlawful, but not malicious, killing of Askin. During the trial, it was proven that he was the last man to leave the wrecked ship, and, when he entered the long boat, he found a widowed mother crying for her sick daughter, Isabelle, who had been inadvertently left on the doomed ship. Holmes immediately climbed up the ship’s side and, at great peril to his life, ran astern, located the sick girl, and placing her over his shoulder climbed down the ship’s side and restored her to her mother. With the exception of a shirt and trousers, he gave all of his clothing to the women in the boat and uttered words of encouragement to the remainder of the passengers and crew. It was proven that the first mate lost courage and turned the command of the boat over to Holmes, ...
    続きを読む 一部表示
    6 分