The Savannah morning news. (Savannah, Ga.) 1900-current, 1901-10-18
THE MoLINEux CASE.

THE MOLINEUX CASE.
The Molineux case is once more
brought prominently into public notice
hy the New York Court of Appeals re-
versal of the conviction and order of
a new trial. This places young Moh-
neu2. in the position he occupied pre-
vious to the former trial, with the ex-
ception that certain testimony admitted
by the court in the first trial must be
left out in the one to follow. 1t is
believed by astute lawyers that the
position is now favorable to the &C
cused.
1t would be superfiuous to go into
history of the case, since it has become
one of the celebrated modern criminal
causes and all newspaper readers are
familiar with its salient points. 1t will
suffice. therefore, to touch only its
most prominent features. Roland B.
Molineux, son of a distinguished and
highly honored father, was arrested in
February 1892 charged with the muir
der by poison of Mrs. Katherine
Adams, who had died during the De-
cember previous. 1t was the allegation
that Molineux had anonymously sent
a poisonous powder under an innocent
label to Mrs. Adams house, intending
that it should be received and swallow
ed by one of her boarders. Harry Cor
nish But Mrs. Adams took the poison
instead of the intended victim. In
connection with this tragedy there was
- tn
trigue, jealousy, hatred and revenge,
involving many persons, as well as the
death of another person, Harry Barnet,
under suspicious circumstances.
At the trial of young Molneux, which
continued for fifty-seven days, ending
on Feb. 10, 1900, in a verdict of guilty.
there was developed no direct evidence
to connect him with the crime. 1t
was all circumstantiaI evidence, de-
pending for its coherency upon the tes-
timony of handwriting experts, and the
admission of the story of the Barnet
tragedy as a part of the case under con-
sideration. The conclusions of the
handwriting experts, as will be remem-
| bered, were conflicting. Some of them
testified that to moral certainty Moli-
neux had written the address on the
| poison package, while others were
| equally positive that he had done moth
ing of the kind. Molineux had not been
indicted for the murder of Barnet, new
ertheless the prosecution presented and
the court admitted evidence for the
purpose of showing that Molineux sent
| the poison which killed Barnet as well
| as that which killed Mrs Adams.
| Taken together these two deaths af-
| forded a plausible theory of the Adams
murder, upon which Molineux was
convicted and sentenced to death.
| Taken separately, it is claimed that
| the Adams case would not have pro-
| duced evidence sufficient to convict. 1t
| should be borne in mind, just here. that
yellow journalism" busted itself to a.
remarkable degree with this extraordi-
nary case. Day after day certain of
the New York papers printed elaborate
diagrams and pictures to show how it
could not be otherwise than that young
Molineux was a degenerate and had
committed both murders in a shrewd
and fiendish plan of revenge. The yell
lows had a sensation, and they made
the most Of it.
Meanwhile there was doubt in the
public mind as to the fairness of his
trial, as we'll as his guilt. The Tribune
says that nine enths of the intelligent
people who followed the course of the
trial looked forward to a reversal of the
conviction. And the Court of Appeals
conclusion was unanimous, notwith-
standing there were differences with
respect to details. In its decision the
court places restrictions upon the hand
writing expert testimony that may be
admitted at the next trial, and says
the Barnet testimony must be eliminat-
ed altogether With these restrictions
it is possible that the case may never
come to trial again, and that Molineux
may be released on bail, as DR.. Ken
nedy was.
1t is of interest to note that the for
mer trial cost the public $150,000 and the
family of -the defendant 100000. A
second trial would hardly be less costly.
|