The Washington times., 1902-09-21
NEW YORK, Sept. 10. 1902.

HY the recent death of the cele-
X brated criminal lawyer William
r. Howe, senior member of the
law firm of Howe & Hummel, and
also by the approaching second trial of
Roland B. Molineux for the murder of
Katherine J.. Adams in 1897. are re-
called some extraordinary trials in the
archaeological history Of this CITY,
William F. Howe was one of the most
picturesque figures at the American
bar during his long and eminent career.
In the course Of his fifty years of prac-
tice in this city he had defended nearly
q thousand men and women in homicide
cases. A very remarkable percentage OF
them enjoyed almost miraculous escapes
from death sentences through the In
renious tactics of their counsel. His
procedure was absolutely distinctive and
fnimitable. Gifted with voice OF un-
usual range, he could paint word pic
ture with remarkable imaginative ef-
feet and at the same time enact dla-
logue with consummate art.
He utilized every dramatic possible
ity In a courtroom. In his famous de-
fense of Ella Nelson, who shot the man
vho played her false. he stopped sudden
,v IN the midst of an impassioned ap-
neal. The prisoner was seated next to
him. heavily veiled in black. her head
buried between her hands. Her counsel
Unexpectedly wheeled around, seized her
wrists. quickly wrenched them apart and
held her arms distended so that her fea-
tures were exposed to the gaze OF the
Jury. He appealed to the jurors to gaze
at the face OF the prisoner-at the fea-
lures which proclaimed broken heart.
Her Acquittal.
The celebrity of his action had fright
ened the woman. Her face of ashen hue
was deluged with tears and the desired
impression was made on each juror. The
district attorney would not permit the
woman to enter a plea of murder in the
second degree. thinking her conviction
for the higher crime certain. So the
Jury returned verdict of acquittal.
William F. Howe defended the notori-
GUS Edward Unger. who murdered his
lodRer. Bolles, in order to steal his
hank book. The body Of the murdered
man had been terribly mutilated and
Unger confessed to the deed. His coun-
sci (Howe) entered plea of self-de-
fense and the district attorney con-
bdently predicted a verdict of guilty.
a
fury Lawyer Howe declared:
The Defense of Unger.
."Gentlemen. Edward Unger did not
cut on the head of the dead man. He
did not mutilate the body He did not
throw the head from the ferryboat
under the paddlewheels. He did not
put the dipalidated trunk in box and
send 1t to Baltimore Then the lawyer
paused. The court was astonished.
Unger virtually had ackn -wledged do
ing each of these things.
It so happened that Unger had at that
moment sitting on his knee his little
seven-year-old child, ignorant of his
peril, running her hand through his
gray 0dlT. AIteT HIS pause tnt lawyer
suddenly pointed toward the child and
exclaimed:
Shifting the Crime.
You all see this little girl 1t was
she who cut off that head. She mutt
lated that body. 1t was not Unger. II
was she-it was she, for Unger could
not bear the thought of having it said,
with this beautiful, innocent child liv-
ing, that he, her father, had commit
ted so horrible a deed, and therefore.
when in a moment it occurred to him |
that he could hide the deed which had
been perpetrated, he mutilated the body. |
Jt was the thought of that little girl |
which caused him to do it, and there |
fore say 1t was she who did it-she."
Attorney Howe's Eloquence.
The effect was remarkable. Unger es-
capped with comparatively insignificant
sentence. Howe was SO eloquent. hum
sreus. and pathetic as pleader. and