The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1901-10-16
trial FOR
ROL And MOL TX.
Noted Poisoning Case i. New York
10 be Reopened.
LOWER COURT MADE ERRORS.
Principal One Was In Admission Of Evidence
as to Another Alleged Crime
and Merging of
Issues.
LOWER COURT MADE ERRORS.
(By Associated Press.)

ALBANY, N. Y, Oct. s15.-The Court Of
Appeals to-day granted Roland B. Moli-
neux a new trial.
MolineuX was convicted of the murder
Of Katherine j. Adams, in New York city.
and sentenced to Death The court grants
a new trial on a prevailing opinion writ
ten by. Judge Werner, of Rochester, his
principal ground being that the lower
court erred in admitting evidence as to
another alleged crime (the death of Bar
metz and thus merged two issues.
Justices Parker, sHaight and Gray did
not believe that the Barnet evidence
should be kept entirely out of the case
Judges Werner, Bartlett, Vann and O'Bcien
concurred in the prevailing opinion and
for: the expunging of the Barnet testi
1nony.
The court gave out a condensed state
ment of the reasons for granting the new
trial. 1 says:
Every member Of the Court of Appeals
agrees for the reversal of the judgment
of conviction of NIolineux on the ground
that the trial court erred in receiving in
evidence the declara tons of Barnet. mads
to Drs. Phillips and Douglass, that he
had received kutnow powders through
the mail.
HANDWRITING.
All agree that since the amendment OF
section 2 of chapter IS of the laws of 1856
by chapter 555 of the laws OF 1855, genuine
writings may be received in evidence rs
standards of comparison with a disputed
writing, although such writing may not
be the issue on trial, but simply fact
relevant and material to that issue. That
the genuneness of such writings must
be established to the satisfaction of the
court by common law evidence and when
that is done handwriting experts may
compare the disputed writings with tho
genuine writings and give their opinion
thereon, but they cannot select and cs-
tablish the standards of comparison and
then compare them with the disputed
writings.
"4All writings proved to the satisfaction
of the court by preponderance of evi-
dence.1n civil cases, and beyond a rea-
sonable doubt in criminal cases, % by
witnesses who saw the paper written, or
to whom it had been acknowledged; (2)
by witnesses familiar with the handwrit-
ing of the person charged to be the wri-
ter, and who are able to testify from their
familiarity to a belief respecting its gem
uineness; 90 where the writing is shown
to have been recognized and acquiesced
in by the person supposed to have writ
lell II VI ttuCpleis- Or EdcIeU upon Dy MIN
in his business transactions, or other
concerns, may under the statute be com
pared with the disputed writing by wit
nesses. But the court should refuse to
receive; in evidence solely for the pur-
pose Of comparison any writing otherwise
prejudicial to the defendant
| BARNET CASE.
THE only subject. about which the
members of the court differ in their opin-
ions relates to the testimony introduced
tending to show that Molineux caused
the death of Barnet by the same method
as that used in taking the life of Mrs
Adams. Four of the members of the cour..
OBrlen. Bartlett, Vann and Werner. agree
that the evidence should not have been
received, but reason for it is stated in
the cGinons written by O'Brien and Wer-
ner The other three judges. Parker.
CHI j.. anG Gray ana Haight, J. r.. hold
TINT thct evidences &c. :ss.r,o =, .r,,+
the evidence in the Barnet case pointing
toward MolineauN tends to identify him
as the person who killed Mrs Adams,
While attempting to take the life of Cor
nish by means OF rare poinson known as
cyanide Of mercury. the Chief Justice and
Judge Gray writing opinions to that eff
feet"