Speaker 1: You're listening to History on Trial, a production of iHeart Podcasts.
Speaker 1: Listener discretion advised. Catherine Adams woke up on the morning
Speaker 1: of December twenty eighth, eighteen ninety eight, with a pounding headache.
Speaker 1: It was the wine, she thought. The night before, Catherine,
Speaker 1: a fifty two year old widow, her adult daughter Florence,
Speaker 1: and their tenant, a distant relative of theirs named Harry Cornish,
Speaker 1: had gone to the theater and then to a late
Speaker 1: dinner at which they'd enjoyed. Catherine now thought, maybe a
Speaker 1: little too much wine. Well, nothing to be done about it.
Speaker 1: She got out of bed and began tidying their apartment,
Speaker 1: a cozy second floor space only a block west of
Speaker 1: Central Park on New York's Upper West Side. But an
Speaker 1: hour later, the headache had only gotten worse. Catherine was
Speaker 1: holding a moist washcloth to her head when her daughter
Speaker 1: Florence emerged from her bedroom around nine a m. Florence,
Speaker 1: seeing her mother's suffering, suggested that she take some Bromo seltzer,
Speaker 1: a popular hangover remedy. Harry had brought a bottle home
Speaker 1: only the day before. He'd received it in the mail,
Speaker 1: along with a charming silver bottle holder. Earlier that week,
Speaker 1: the package, addressed to Harry at his office at the
Speaker 1: Knickerbocker Athletic Club had had no return address. Harry and
Speaker 1: his coworkers had assumed it was a practical joke, a
Speaker 1: gag gift reminding him not to drink too much over
Speaker 1: the holidays. Katherine and Florence teased Harry that it had
Speaker 1: come from a secret admirer, but whoever the center, Catherine
Speaker 1: was grateful to them. Now, following the instructions on the bottle,
Speaker 1: Catherine mixed a heaping teaspoonful of the powder into a
Speaker 1: small glass of water and drank It. Tasted awful, so
Speaker 1: bitter that she couldn't finish her water, leaving a mouthful
Speaker 1: at the bottom of the glass. Awful, she said. Harry
Speaker 1: teasingly took the glass and swallowed the remnants, saying, tastes
Speaker 1: all right to me. It's supposed to be bitter. It's medicine.
Speaker 1: But this medicine wasn't just bitter. There was something wrong
Speaker 1: with it. Within minutes, Catherine was seized by a wave
Speaker 1: of nausea. She pushed her way into the bathroom where
Speaker 1: Florence was washing up, and began vomiting profusely, groaning in agony.
Speaker 1: At first, Florence thought Catherine had just had a reaction
Speaker 1: to the foul tasting medicine, but then she saw her
Speaker 1: mother's face. It was a terrible blue color. Catherine bent
Speaker 1: over the toilet, raised her hands to her daughter, and
Speaker 1: then collapsed. Florence screamed for Harry in his bedroom. Harry
Speaker 1: himself wasn't feeling so good. He was a strong, healthy man,
Speaker 1: but he was suddenly feeling weak and queasy. When he
Speaker 1: got to the bathroom, he found he couldn't lift Catherine,
Speaker 1: something he should have been able to easily do. With
Speaker 1: the help of their HouseGuest, Fred Hovey, Harry and Florence
Speaker 1: maneuvered Catherine onto the couch and sent for a doctor.
Speaker 1: By the time doctor Edwin Hitchcock arrived only a few
Speaker 1: minutes later, Catherine's breathing was labored, her pulse was faint,
Speaker 1: and her skin was clammy. Hitchcock administered stimulants and gave
Speaker 1: Catherine artificial respiration. Harry Cornish's condition had worsened. Now he
Speaker 1: was throwing up in the bathroom. Florence explained to doctor
Speaker 1: Hitchcock that both Harry and her mother had taken some
Speaker 1: bromo seltzer right before falling ill. The doctor examined the bottle,
Speaker 1: then dipped a pinky finger into the powder, wiping all
Speaker 1: but a single speck off. Hitchcock placed his fingertip to
Speaker 1: his tongue and recoiled. He had tasted bitter almonds. This
Speaker 1: was not medicine. It was cyanide. Harry Cornish, after several
Speaker 1: days of suffering, managed to pull through. Catherine Adams was
Speaker 1: not so lucky. She died shortly after doctor Hitchcock arrived.
Speaker 1: Newspapers quickly jumped on the story. An anonymous poisoner delivering
Speaker 1: death through the mail made for a good copy for
Speaker 1: the city's tabloid style yellow papers, and soon enough the
Speaker 1: story got even wilder because it turned out that Catherine
Speaker 1: Adams was not the only person to die from cyanide
Speaker 1: disguised as medicine in eighteen ninety eight. A month earlier,
Speaker 1: a man named Henry Crossman Barnett had died after taking
Speaker 1: a dose of Cutno's improved effervescent powder, another supposed hangover Keir.
Speaker 1: Though Barnett's doctor had attributed his death to diphtheria, he'd
Speaker 1: had the powder tested just in case and found cyanide.
Speaker 1: And that wasn't the only connection between the two cases.
Speaker 1: Henry Barnett had died in his room at the Knickerbocker
Speaker 1: Athletic Club, the very club that Harry Cornish worked at.
Speaker 1: Terror gripped New Yorkers. Was there a serial poisoner in
Speaker 1: their midst The police would soon zero in on a
Speaker 1: surprising suspect, but proving their case was easier said than done,
Speaker 1: and their investigation would lead to a series of dramatic
Speaker 1: courtroom confrontations whose outcomes still echo today. Welcome to History
Speaker 1: on Trial. I'm your host, Mira Hayward. This week New
Speaker 1: York v. Rowland Malineux, Part one. Before the Nightmare began,
Speaker 1: Edward Molineux was living the American dream. Born in England
Speaker 1: in eighteen thirty three, Edward Kington New York. As a
Speaker 1: small child, those early years were not easy, but Edward
Speaker 1: was disciplined and determined. Soon enough, his hard work saw
Speaker 1: him rise through the ranks of both the paint manufacturing
Speaker 1: industry and the New York National Guard. His bravery and
Speaker 1: compassionate leadership during the Civil War made him a hero
Speaker 1: and earned him the rank of general. After the war,
Speaker 1: he joined a new company, C. T. Reynolds and helped
Speaker 1: turn it into the largest paint manufacturer in the country,
Speaker 1: earning a fortune in the process. He and his beloved wife, Hattie,
Speaker 1: had three handsome, intelligent sons. From the outside, everything seemed perfect,
Speaker 1: but inside the Malnu brownstone on Fort Greene Place, something
Speaker 1: dark was festering. The trouble was Roland, the Molinu's middle son,
Speaker 1: born in eighteen sixty six. There was nothing outwardly wrong
Speaker 1: with Roland. He was clever, well mannered, and exceptionally athletic,
Speaker 1: A national champion in amateur gymnastics. He dressed beautifully and
Speaker 1: was fastidious about his grooming. Roland was a talented chemist.
Speaker 1: He worked first for his father's company, and then was
Speaker 1: recruited away by Morris Herman and Co, another manufacturer, who
Speaker 1: made him the superintendent and chief chemist of their Newark
Speaker 1: paint factory. Roland was dedicated to his work, literally living
Speaker 1: at his job. Herman and Co. Gave him an apartment
Speaker 1: on the second floor of the factory, which Roland filled
Speaker 1: with luxurious furnishings and stocked with dry paints and chemicals
Speaker 1: so he could continue working after hours. Okay, so Roland
Speaker 1: was athletic, clever, and industrious. These are all good things.
Speaker 1: What's less appealing is constantly talking about how athletic, clever
Speaker 1: and industrious you are, which seemed to be Roland's favorite activity. Plus,
Speaker 1: Roland was a snob. He had a way of tilting
Speaker 1: his head back and literally looking down his nose at people,
Speaker 1: a chilly, superior way of speaking. He liked to be
Speaker 1: the smartest person in the room, the strongest, the most powerful.
Speaker 1: He didn't like people who got more attention than him,
Speaker 1: So in a way, it's not surprising that Roland didn't
Speaker 1: like Harry Cornish. The two men first met in early
Speaker 1: eighteen ninety six, when Harry became athletic director of the
Speaker 1: Knickerbocker Athletic Club. The newly opened Knickerbocker was a gym
Speaker 1: and social club where New York's elite could play squash
Speaker 1: and smoke cigars. To help boost the club's reputation, its owner,
Speaker 1: Jay Herbert Ballentine, had recruited some of the city's best athletes,
Speaker 1: including his friend Roland Molineu. Roland liked the club so
Speaker 1: much that he'd taken an apartment on its second floor
Speaker 1: and joined several of its management committees. Vallentine also recruited
Speaker 1: a top notch staff, hiring Harry Cornish to be athletic
Speaker 1: director in eighteen ninety six. Harry Cornish was one of
Speaker 1: the most famous sportsman in America. He'd been the athletic
Speaker 1: director of the Boston and Chicago Athletic Clubs, written a
Speaker 1: book on physical training for Spalding, and organized the athletic
Speaker 1: games at the eighteen ninety three Chicago World's Fair. His
Speaker 1: appearance fit his reputation. At thirty two, Harry looked like
Speaker 1: an ideal Victorian athlete, muscular and hyper masculine, with a
Speaker 1: luxuriant handlebar mustache. His arrival at Knickerbocker made the news,
Speaker 1: with The New York Times writing quote, as a mentor
Speaker 1: and promoter of athletics, mister Cornish is without a peer.
Speaker 1: Soon enough, people started calling the Knickerbockers athletes Cornish's men.
Speaker 1: That rubbed Roland Molineux the wrong way. In his mind,
Speaker 1: he should have been the star of the Knickerbocker. After all,
Speaker 1: he was a national champion. Harry Cornish was just an employee.
Speaker 1: Roland didn't like Harry on a personal level either. He
Speaker 1: thought Harry was vulgar and coarse, and alleged that he
Speaker 1: neglected the club's facilities. Throughout eighteen ninety six and eighteen
Speaker 1: ninety seven, hostilities between the two men escalated. Roland got
Speaker 1: some of Harry's powers removed. Harry spread rumors that Roland
Speaker 1: owned a brothel. Tensions finally reached a crescendo in December
Speaker 1: eighteen ninety seven, when a squabble between Roland and Harry
Speaker 1: got escalated to the club's board. Roland issued the board
Speaker 1: an ultimatum fire Harry Cornish or he would resign from
Speaker 1: the club. Alas Roland had overestimated his own importance. Sure,
Speaker 1: Harry was just an employee, but Roland was just a member.
Speaker 1: There were plenty of rich, young athletes to take his place.
Speaker 1: The board told Roland they were keeping Harry. Roland immediately
Speaker 1: resigned his membership and moved out of his apartment, and
Speaker 1: Harry Cornish, delighted, taunted Roland, saying, you son of a bitch.
Speaker 1: You thought you'd get me out and I got you
Speaker 1: out instead. Roland simply smiled at Harry, waved his hand
Speaker 1: and said you win. But inside he was seething and
Speaker 1: wrote letters to friends detailing all of Harry's flaws. Roland's
Speaker 1: departure from the Knickerbocker wasn't the only blow he faced
Speaker 1: in late eighteen ninety seven. He had also been bested
Speaker 1: in love. That August, on a yacht in Rhode Island,
Speaker 1: Roland had met a twenty three year old aspiring singer
Speaker 1: named Blanche Cheesebrow. Blanche was a newcomer to Roland's elite set.
Speaker 1: She'd had an unstable childhood, dragged around the country by
Speaker 1: her father, a dreamer with an insatiable appetite for get
Speaker 1: rich quick schemes. Blanche's siblings had all settled down. Two
Speaker 1: of her sisters had married wealthy men, which is how
Speaker 1: Blanche ended up on the yacht that summer. Her sisters
Speaker 1: wanted her to meet a successful man too, but Blanche
Speaker 1: had different dreams. A gifted singer, she wanted to pursue
Speaker 1: a career on the stage. She'd had some success already,
Speaker 1: performing at Carnegie Hall and working as a featured soloist
Speaker 1: in a prestigious Brooklyn Church choir, but she wanted more.
Speaker 1: She wanted to see the world have adventures. When she
Speaker 1: met the thirty one year old Roland that summer, she
Speaker 1: found he shared the same passion for music and traveling.
Speaker 1: Roland immediately besotted with the charismatics. Stylish Blanche fed her fantasies,
Speaker 1: describing trips they could take to see the symphony in
Speaker 1: Paris or the opera in Milan. That autumn, Blanche and
Speaker 1: Roland saw each other regularly in New York. Roland showered
Speaker 1: Blanche with gifts and experiences, shows on Broadway, jewelry, from
Speaker 1: Tiffany's dinner at Delmonico's. He was devoted, but Blanche was uneasy.
Speaker 1: She enjoyed Roland's company, but something was missing. I wanted
Speaker 1: passion and love in my life, she would write years later,
Speaker 1: I wanted my existence to be fervid and glowing. With Roland,
Speaker 1: that passion was lacking, especially physically. In early November eighteen
Speaker 1: ninety seven, Blanche and Roland were at the Metropolitan Opera
Speaker 1: when they ran into a friend of Roland's, Henry Crossman.
Speaker 1: Barnett Barney, as he was known, also lived at the Knickerbocker.
Speaker 1: He and Roland had bonded over their mutual dislike of
Speaker 1: Harry Cornish, although Barney, who was not an athlete, was
Speaker 1: more annoyed by Harry's lackluster supervision of the janitorial staff,
Speaker 1: than he was by the man's athletic prowess. Thirty one
Speaker 1: years old, Barney joviality. He had a round face, a
Speaker 1: plump build, and twinkling blue eyes. He was a social
Speaker 1: butterfly with a charming, confident attitude that won over men
Speaker 1: and women alike. Blanche was instantly taken by him, writing
Speaker 1: later quote, I sensed a hidden strength and a brute
Speaker 1: force in him, and it was as natural as breathing
Speaker 1: that I should capitulate to that. Her fascination with Barney
Speaker 1: was so strong that when Roland got down on one
Speaker 1: knee that Thanksgiving, Blanche said no. She told Roland that
Speaker 1: she might change her mind in the future, but that
Speaker 1: hardly softened the blow, especially once rumors spread that she
Speaker 1: had been seen unchaperoned in Barney's apartment at the Knickerbocker.
Speaker 1: Roland was distraught, but again he maintained his outward composure.
Speaker 1: When Blanche again rejected him in January eighteen ninety eight,
Speaker 1: he repeated the same phrase he had used with Harry
Speaker 1: Cornish the month before, saying, quote, tell Barnett the coast
Speaker 1: is clear. He wins and for a while the coast
Speaker 1: did seem clear. Blanche and Barney kept seeing each other.
Speaker 1: Roland drowned his sorrows in the seedy bars of Lower Manhattan.
Speaker 1: He spent time in Europe. He grew a handlebar mustache
Speaker 1: and then shaved it off, typical breakup activities. Then, in September,
Speaker 1: Blanche had a sudden change of heart. She ended her
Speaker 1: relationship with Barney and told Roland she would marry him.
Speaker 1: What motivated this reversal is unknown, but Roland was thrilled. Unfortunately,
Speaker 1: Barney proved a hard habit to quit. Soon after she
Speaker 1: agreed to marry Roland, Blanche started reaching out to Barney again.
Speaker 1: He put her off, but eventually agreed to see her
Speaker 1: in late September. The meeting didn't go as Blanche had hoped.
Speaker 1: Barney told her that they were finished. Any hope of
Speaker 1: even a friendship between them had disappeared when she'd agreed
Speaker 1: to marry Roland a month later. On October twenty eighth,
Speaker 1: eighteen ninety eight, Barney summoned the Knickerbocker's night watchman, Joseph Moore,
Speaker 1: and asked him to get a doctor. Barney told Moore
Speaker 1: that he'd woken up with a hangover and taken a
Speaker 1: dose from a sample tin of cutnose improved efferbescent powder
Speaker 1: that he'd received a few months earlier, But the medicine
Speaker 1: wasn't sitting well. He was throwing up and had diarrhea.
Speaker 1: Doctor Wendell Phillips, a fellow club member, came to check
Speaker 1: on Barney. After procuring him medicines to calm his stomach,
Speaker 1: Phillips told Barney to get some rest. By the next day,
Speaker 1: Barney's gastro intestinal symptoms had subsided, but his mouth and
Speaker 1: throat were extremely sore. Another doctor, Henry Douglas, examined him
Speaker 1: and diagnosed him with a mild case of diphtheria. Douglas,
Speaker 1: hearing about Barney's fears that his cut nose powder had
Speaker 1: been poisoned, sent the powder in for testing. The medicine
Speaker 1: tested positive for cyanide, but that actually didn't concern Douglas,
Speaker 1: at least not then. Cyanide was at this time a
Speaker 1: common ingredient in medicine, albeit in small doses. Douglas was
Speaker 1: sure that Barney's symptoms were just caused by diphtheria. Barney
Speaker 1: took the dip furia medicine Douglas prescribed, but a week
Speaker 1: later he was still feeling terrible. He was so weak
Speaker 1: that he required round the clock supervision from nurses. Early
Speaker 1: on the morning of November tenth, one of the nurses
Speaker 1: called doctor Douglas. Barney was getting worse. Douglas arrived and
Speaker 1: knew at once that Barney's heart was failing. This could
Speaker 1: happen with diphtheria. Later that afternoon, Barney died, aged thirty two.
Speaker 1: His funeral was held on Saturday, November twelve. Blanche attended.
Speaker 1: One week later, Blanche and Roland got married. One month
Speaker 1: after that, Harry Cornish received a bottle of Bromo seltzer
Speaker 1: in the mail. Newspapers started covering Catherine Adams's death the
Speaker 1: very day she died. It took only another twenty four
Speaker 1: hours for reporters at Joseph Pulitzer's paper, The New York
Speaker 1: World to draw a connection between Adams's death and Barnett's newspapers,
Speaker 1: like the World and William Randolphurst's New York Journal, thrived
Speaker 1: off publishing sensational crime stories, and the poisoning case was
Speaker 1: especially appealing. In historian Harold Scheckter's book on the Malinu
Speaker 1: case titled The Devil's Gentlemen, Scheckter writes of the public's
Speaker 1: fascination with certain crimes often mirrors their larger societal concerns.
Speaker 1: At a time when people could never be certain of
Speaker 1: what they were putting into their Checkter says, when medicines
Speaker 1: were made of strychnine and arsenic, bakers preserved their dough
Speaker 1: with sulfur of copper, babies consumed swill milk from cows
Speaker 1: fed on distillery waste, and soldiers received rations of embalmed beef.
Speaker 1: The poisoner haunted the imagination of the American public. Reporters
Speaker 1: did more than just cover the Great Poison Mystery. As
Speaker 1: the case came to be known, they also investigated it.
Speaker 1: Journalists ran parallel investigations with the police, racing to break
Speaker 1: the case before the authorities did. On December twenty ninth,
Speaker 1: the day after Catherine Adams died, Hearst's Evening Journal's front
Speaker 1: page featured a blown up copy of the handwritten label
Speaker 1: from the package Harry Cornish had received, with the headline
Speaker 1: who knows this writing it was fortunate that this label
Speaker 1: had even survived. When Harry received the package he'd thrown
Speaker 1: the wrap in the trash, but his assistant, Patrick Finneran
Speaker 1: had told him to keep the paper Harry might be
Speaker 1: able to identify the anonymous sender through the handwriting. At
Speaker 1: this point, they had all thought the package was a
Speaker 1: practical joke. No one had realized how high the stakes
Speaker 1: of this identification would turn out to be. A day
Speaker 1: after the Journal published the label, John Adams, another Knickerbocker
Speaker 1: employee with no relation to Catherine Adams, recognized the handwriting
Speaker 1: as the Knickerbocker's secretary. Adams conducted the club's correspondence and
Speaker 1: was thus familiar with many of the member's handwriting. To
Speaker 1: confirm his suspicion, he pulled a number of letters from
Speaker 1: the club's files. When he was certain that the handwriting matched,
Speaker 1: Adams went to Harry Cornish's office. The handwriting on the label,
Speaker 1: Adams showed Harry looked just like the handwriting in a
Speaker 1: resignation letter written on December twentieth, eighteen ninety seven, a
Speaker 1: letter written by Roland Molineux. Harry Cornish shared Adams's findings
Speaker 1: with Captain George McCluskey, chief of the New York Police
Speaker 1: Department's Detectives Bureau. In a long conversation on December thirty first,
Speaker 1: the men discussed Harry's fraught history with Roland, as well
Speaker 1: as Roland's relationships with Barney and Blanche. This would not
Speaker 1: be the last time that McCluskey heard Roland Molineu's name.
Speaker 1: Though the police denied that they were pursuing Roland after
Speaker 1: papers published his name in January. In truth, more and
Speaker 1: more clues were pointing his way. Addie Bates, one of
Speaker 1: the nurses who had cared for Barney during his final days,
Speaker 1: told police about a peculiar gift her patient had received.
Speaker 1: A popular man, Barney had been sent dozens of well
Speaker 1: wishes and presents from friends, but only one had seemed
Speaker 1: to really affect him. Bates remembered a bouquet of chrysanthemums,
Speaker 1: accompanied by a note of what Bates called quote an
Speaker 1: affectionate nature. The note had been signed Yours Blanche. It
Speaker 1: wasn't hard for detectives to draw a line between this
Speaker 1: note and Blanche Molineux. But this note didn't prove anything.
Speaker 1: It just gave the police a hint at Roland's potential motive.
Speaker 1: They'd have to find something more concrete. Using the remnants
Speaker 1: of a partially removed price tag on the silver bottleholder
Speaker 1: that had been sent to Harry Cornish, detectives tracked the
Speaker 1: item first to its manufacturer and then to a retail
Speaker 1: jewelry shop called Hartigan and Co. In Newark. Hartigan's was
Speaker 1: very close to the paint factory where Roland lived and worked.
Speaker 1: On the day Hartigan sold the bottle holder, December twenty first,
Speaker 1: Newark police detective Joseph Ferrell, who knew Roland well, had
Speaker 1: seen Roland walking near the Hartigan store. Roland told Farrell
Speaker 1: he had just been dining with his boss, Morris Herman,
Speaker 1: but Hermann denied this to police. However, the clerk who
Speaker 1: made the sale at Hartigan's, Emma Miller, could not identify
Speaker 1: the buyer and claimed that he had a red beard,
Speaker 1: which Roland did not. This pattern of tracing a lead
Speaker 1: almost back to Roland, but failing to conclusively tie it
Speaker 1: to the man continuously frustrated at the detectives. It happened
Speaker 1: again with the Bromo Seltzer bottle. The police had arranged
Speaker 1: for doctor Rudolph Whitehouse, a prominent toxicologist and forensic medicine
Speaker 1: expert to examine the bottle. Though the dark blue glass
Speaker 1: bottle looked like an authentic Emerson's Bromo Seltzer bottle, Whithouse
Speaker 1: discovered it was a forgery. The bottle didn't have the
Speaker 1: company's name embossed on it and was slightly smaller than
Speaker 1: the real thing. Whithouse discovered a manufacturer's mark on the bottle.
Speaker 1: The detectives traced to a chemical firm called Powers and
Speaker 1: Weightmen in Newark. Powers and Weightmen had sold ten bottles
Speaker 1: containing cyanide of mercury, the poison that Whitthouse identified in
Speaker 1: the bottle, to another Newark business, the pharmaceutical supplier Ceebee
Speaker 1: Sme and Co. In July eighteen ninety eight. After a
Speaker 1: laborious search through thousands of their sales slips, detectives found
Speaker 1: that two of those bottles had ended up at Ballboch
Speaker 1: and Co. A metal smelting company based only two blocks
Speaker 1: away from the Herman and Co. Paint factory. But again
Speaker 1: detectives couldn't link these bottles to Roland Molineux. The chemist
Speaker 1: at Ballbach claimed that he had used up all the
Speaker 1: cyanide in experiments. The next swing and a Miss came
Speaker 1: from trying to trace the poison. Henry Barnett had taken
Speaker 1: the tin which Barney had received in the fall of
Speaker 1: eighteen ninety eight, purported to be a sample of Cutnose
Speaker 1: improved efferveescent powder. The tin turned out to be legitimate,
Speaker 1: though the contents had likely been tampered with, so the
Speaker 1: police turned to Cutnose to try to identify sample recipients.
Speaker 1: The company sent samples to customers who wrote in requests.
Speaker 1: Owner Gustav Cutno explained these request letters were saved for
Speaker 1: future mo marketing. Cutno continued and detectives were welcome to
Speaker 1: look through them. Fortunately, Cutnoe could narrow down the window.
Speaker 1: The tin had been sent in to a six month
Speaker 1: period thanks to a specific sticker. Unfortunately, during these six
Speaker 1: months alone, the company had received more than one hundred
Speaker 1: thousand letters people have always loved free samples. Three detectives,
Speaker 1: with the assistance of Cutnoe's bookkeeper, Elsie Gray, began the tedious,
Speaker 1: laborious search. Seven days later, Elsie Gray struck gold. She
Speaker 1: found a letter one written on Robin's Egg blue stationery
Speaker 1: emblazoned with interlocking silver crescents, with handwriting that looked much
Speaker 1: like the handwriting on the poison package addressed to Harry Cornish.
Speaker 1: There were just two problems. First, the letter had come
Speaker 1: in on December twenty third, six weeks after Barney had died.
Speaker 1: And secondly, the signature at the bottom of the letter
Speaker 1: read not R. Molineux or even H. Barnett, but confusingly
Speaker 1: H Cornish. What could this mean? Following their return address
Speaker 1: on the letter, detectives found a private letterbox company owned
Speaker 1: by a man named Joseph Koch. Coke told detectives he'd
Speaker 1: rented box number ten to a man named Harry Cornish
Speaker 1: in early December, but when detectives brought Harry Cornish to
Speaker 1: Koch's offices, Coke didn't think this was the man who'd
Speaker 1: rented the letterbox. Captain McCleskey wasn't surprised. He would later
Speaker 1: say that the use of Harry Cornish's name only further
Speaker 1: convinced him of Roland Molineu's guilt. In McCluskey's words, quote,
Speaker 1: the next best thing to killing an enemy is to
Speaker 1: have him accused of murder. The post office box gave
Speaker 1: detectives another lead to go on by following up on
Speaker 1: a package that arrived at the box shortly after they
Speaker 1: discovered it. Police found that the box owners had using
Speaker 1: the same Robin's Egg blue stationery as in the cutnos
Speaker 1: letter written to multiple medical companies to request samples of
Speaker 1: their cures for mail impotence. One of these companies found
Speaker 1: a letter whose handwriting and stationary matched, but had a
Speaker 1: different return address and purported this time to come from
Speaker 1: an H. Barnett. Detectives followed this information to another private
Speaker 1: letter box. Maybe this time they could find a real
Speaker 1: connection to Molineux. Examining the mail in the second mailbox,
Speaker 1: the police found correspondence with Marston's Remedy Company. When they
Speaker 1: contacted Marston's, the owner handed them a diagnosis form that
Speaker 1: a customer had filled out using the name Barnett. But
Speaker 1: the descriptions in the diagnosis form the patient's age, height, measurements,
Speaker 1: and medical history didn't match Henry Barnett. They matched Roland Molineux. Unfortunately,
Speaker 1: this lead to fizzled when the box's owner, Nicholas Heckman,
Speaker 1: said he wanted payment to make an idea of the
Speaker 1: box's renter and refused to cooperate with police. Joseph Coch,
Speaker 1: owner of the other private box also stopped cooperating, saying
Speaker 1: he was too frightened to get involved. The police were
Speaker 1: getting frustrated, and they weren't the only ones. Throughout January,
Speaker 1: the newspaper's coverage of the investigation had become more and
Speaker 1: more critical. In an editorial in early February, William Randolph
Speaker 1: Hurst claimed that the Malnu family's wealth was protecting Roland.
Speaker 1: A little rich coming from the guy who inspired Citizen Kane.
Speaker 1: But anyways, if this had happened among people without influence,
Speaker 1: every person suspected of knowing anything about it would have
Speaker 1: been locked up before morning, Hurst wrote, But when two deliberate,
Speaker 1: premeditated murders have been committed by persons with financial and
Speaker 1: political poll the whole machinery of justice has been paralyzed.
Speaker 1: Was there any way to set this machinery back in motion?
Speaker 1: On February ninth, eighteen ninety nine, a coroner's inquest into
Speaker 1: Catherine Adams's death began. Coroner's inquests are rare these days,
Speaker 1: but at the time they were called when sudden deaths
Speaker 1: occurred in order to determine if the death was natural
Speaker 1: or not. Coroners and their juries did not typically investigate crimes,
Speaker 1: but they did have the power to subpoena witnesses. In
Speaker 1: the Adams case, the press reported the District Attorney's office
Speaker 1: had gotten fed up with the police's failures and decided
Speaker 1: to use the coroner's inquest to conduct their own investigation.
Speaker 1: Some people were skeptical of the process's efficacy, especially since
Speaker 1: the District Attorney, Asa Bird Gardiner, happened to be an
Speaker 1: old friend of General Edward ma These suspicions were quickly
Speaker 1: confirmed by the conduct of eighty A James Osborne. Osborne
Speaker 1: had a reputation as a bulldog in the courtroom, and
Speaker 1: he quickly dug his teeth into the inquest's first witness,
Speaker 1: not Roland Molineu, but Harry Cornish. In a ferocious examination,
Speaker 1: Osborne all but accused Harry of being the poisoner. Osborne
Speaker 1: brought up Harry's playboy reputation and his arguments with Henry
Speaker 1: Barnett and Roland Molineux. Cornish Da Gardner reminded the press
Speaker 1: was the one who had actually given Catherine Adams the poison.
Speaker 1: In contrast, when Roland Molineux appeared on the stand, Osborne
Speaker 1: treated him with gentle politeness, often apologizing for the uncomfortable questions.
Speaker 1: Duty just required him to ask. Roland, Unlike Harry, who
Speaker 1: had been angry and flustered in court, was cool, calm
Speaker 1: and collected. The press took Osborne's approach as proof of
Speaker 1: the justice system's favoritism. A cartoon in the Evening Journal
Speaker 1: depicted Osborne strangling Harry Cornish in one panel and cuddling
Speaker 1: a child's size Roland Molineu in the other. But as
Speaker 1: Osborne continued to tear Harry apart on the stand and
Speaker 1: brought more witnesses into cast suspicion, even the skeptical press
Speaker 1: began to question Harry. Harry published a highly defensive public
Speaker 1: statement hilariously titled quote Cornish says, some things look bad,
Speaker 1: but he can explain. Perhaps people thought they had been
Speaker 1: too quick to jump on Roland Molineu as a suspect,
Speaker 1: and thinking on it wasn't Harry Cornish the first one
Speaker 1: to point the police at Roland. Had it all been
Speaker 1: a frame? The Molinews were delighted by this turn of events.
Speaker 1: The past two months had been a nightmare for the
Speaker 1: respectability obsessed In general. He had ordered the whole family,
Speaker 1: including Blanche, to retreat into the Fort Green Brownstone, where
Speaker 1: the curtains were always kept drawn to keep the press
Speaker 1: from looking in. The lawyers he hired had vigorously protected Roland,
Speaker 1: refusing any requests from the police, such as submitting a
Speaker 1: handwriting sample. But with the focus turning away from Roland
Speaker 1: and on to Harry, Roland's lawyers thought it might be
Speaker 1: best to change tactics and begin cooperating. On February fourteenth,
Speaker 1: Roland produced a handwriting sample under observation in ady A
Speaker 1: Osborne's office. The inquest ran for nearly two more weeks,
Speaker 1: with evidence against Harry mounting and Roland's delight growing. Even
Speaker 1: the testimony of Nicholas Heckman, the letter box owner, couldn't
Speaker 1: shake Roland's assurance. On Monday, February twenty seventh, the inquest's
Speaker 1: final day, Heckman appeared and claimed that Roland had rented
Speaker 1: a letter box from him. Roland called Heckman a liar,
Speaker 1: but seemed to laugh the whole thing off. But then
Speaker 1: something happened that shook Roland deeply. When his lawyer, Bartow
Speaker 1: Weeks objected to Heckman's further testimony, Dia Gardiner turned on
Speaker 1: Weeks and harshly told him to sit down. Up until
Speaker 1: this point, Gardiner had been unfailingly polite, even deferential to
Speaker 1: Roland's lawyers. In that instant, Roland Malaneu heard the trap
Speaker 1: spring shut. From being the shielded, protected, coddled, and stroked
Speaker 1: friend of the prosecuting officer, reporter Charles Michaelson wrote, Molineux
Speaker 1: suddenly found himself exposed to the full broadside of that
Speaker 1: officer's artillery. The manhunters came from behind their cover of
Speaker 1: soft words and apologies and attacked their quarry. Lulled into
Speaker 1: a false sense of safety, Roland had lowered his defense
Speaker 1: is a fatal mistake of overconfidence. The next witness, William Kinsley,
Speaker 1: showed him just how badly he had aired. Kinsley was
Speaker 1: a nationally recognized handwriting expert, and he testified that the
Speaker 1: handwriting in the sample Roland had provided the ADA matched
Speaker 1: the handwriting on the poison package sent to Harry Cornish,
Speaker 1: as well as the letters sent to the various medical
Speaker 1: companies from the two private letter boxes. Then, to drive
Speaker 1: the point home, Ada Osborne introduced a further six handwriting experts,
Speaker 1: all of whom agreed with Kinsley's conclusions. The final blow
Speaker 1: was delivered by District Attorney Gardner himself, who presented a
Speaker 1: closing summation unusual for a coroner's inquest, Gardner revealed that
Speaker 1: the entire inquest had been a carefully plotted trap on
Speaker 1: which the DA's Office and the police had collaborated. It
Speaker 1: had been Captain McCluskey's idea, Gardener explained, to use an
Speaker 1: inquest to get Roland, the only suspect who had refused
Speaker 1: to provide a handwriting sample, to drop his guard. The
Speaker 1: DA's office had made Harry Cornish their scapegoat, but had
Speaker 1: never truly believed him guilty. It had been Roland all along.
Speaker 1: Roland who had the motive, who had the opportunity, and
Speaker 1: whose handwriting matched all of the incriminating mail. At the
Speaker 1: end of his summation, Gardner asked the coroner's jury to
Speaker 1: assign responsibility for Catherine Adams's death to Roland Molineux. The
Speaker 1: jury did not take long to do just that. After
Speaker 1: less than two hours of deliberation, they announced that they
Speaker 1: believed Roland had sent the poison that killed Adams. Roland
Speaker 1: was quickly arrested and sent to the tombs New York's
Speaker 1: infamous jail. Four days later, a grand jury formally indicted
Speaker 1: him on a charge of first degree murder for the
Speaker 1: day death of Catherine J. Adams. General Molineux vowed to
Speaker 1: fight his son's case till the end, but would his
Speaker 1: good name and his wealth be enough to overcome the
Speaker 1: case being built against Roland. Roland Molineu's journey to trial
Speaker 1: was long and winding. In late March eighteen ninety nine,
Speaker 1: his attorneys managed to get the first indictment against him
Speaker 1: quashed on the grounds that it had been improper for
Speaker 1: the DA's office to discuss Henry Barnett's death at the
Speaker 1: grand jury hearing. On May third, a new grand jury
Speaker 1: was convened, and this time they didn't bring an indictment.
Speaker 1: The press and the DA's office thought they knew why.
Speaker 1: Six members of the jury, including the foreman, were members
Speaker 1: of the same veterans organization as General Edward Molineux. Down
Speaker 1: but not out. The police immediately arrested Roland on the
Speaker 1: charge of assaulting Harry Cornish. When Roland and got out
Speaker 1: on bail for that charge, the police arrested him again
Speaker 1: for Catherine Adams's murder in mid July, a third grand
Speaker 1: jury was convened. These jurors, who had no connections to
Speaker 1: the Molineus, returned an indictment after three days eighty eight.
Speaker 1: James Osborne was so delighted that he telegraphed his wife
Speaker 1: the news writing quote the people won. Inside his jail cell,
Speaker 1: Roland Molineux seemed just as confident as Osborne. Over the
Speaker 1: past five months. He'd maintained his exercise regimen and his
Speaker 1: grooming routine, used his spending money to buy upgraded meals,
Speaker 1: and continuously projected an aura of cool certainty. He had
Speaker 1: faith in his father and in his lawyers, Bartow Weeks
Speaker 1: and George Gordon Battle, both longtime friends of the family
Speaker 1: and skilled attorneys. When Roland's trial finally began on November fourteenth,
Speaker 1: eighteen ninety nine, Weeks and Battle were both by his side,
Speaker 1: as was his father. They weren't his only supporters. Dozens
Speaker 1: of besotted women who'd fallen in love with Roland via
Speaker 1: newspaper coverage were gathered outside the courtroom, begging the guards
Speaker 1: to let them in. The guards refused, the room was
Speaker 1: already packed. At ten thirty am, Judge John Goff called
Speaker 1: the court to order. The fifty one year old Gough
Speaker 1: had made a name for himself rooting out corruption in
Speaker 1: the New York Police Department. As a judge, he was
Speaker 1: short tempered and action oriented, regularly cutting lawyers off to
Speaker 1: ask witnesses questions of his own. Unconcerned with appearing impartial,
Speaker 1: Gough's rulings often revealed his personal beliefs on a given case.
Speaker 1: People had predicted that this would be a long trial,
Speaker 1: but no one imagined quite how long. Jury selection alone
Speaker 1: took more than two weeks. Both Bartow Weeks and A
Speaker 1: DA Osborne claimed they wanted quote of a high order
Speaker 1: of intelligence to be secured as jurors in this case.
Speaker 1: Their method of getting such men was to ask bafflingly
Speaker 1: phrased questions full of legalise and arcane vocabulary, such as
Speaker 1: this one posed by Osborne to a cab driver named
Speaker 1: Hugh Doherty. Quote, do you understand that in order to
Speaker 1: justify legal guilt from circumstantial evidence, the inculpatory facts must
Speaker 1: be absolutely incompatible with the innocence of the accused? Doherty, astounded, replied,
Speaker 1: I never heard that while driving my cab. Despite multiple
Speaker 1: rapprimands from goth and ridicule in the press. The attorneys
Speaker 1: kept this up until finally, on November twenty ninth, they
Speaker 1: managed to pull a jury together. James Osborne presented the
Speaker 1: prosecution's opening statement on Monday, December fourth. He set the
Speaker 1: stakes for the trial high, telling the jurors that the
Speaker 1: country was currently embroiled in quote a fight between society
Speaker 1: and poisoners. Then he walked the case against Roland Molineux.
Speaker 1: When he got to Roland's connection with Henry Barnett, Barto
Speaker 1: Weeks objected, saying that the Barnett case was separate. Judge
Speaker 1: Goff disagreed, ruling quote, if it is apparent that the
Speaker 1: circumstances of one crime are relevant to the other, they
Speaker 1: are admissible. As Osborne spoke, reporters kept a close watch
Speaker 1: on Roland, milking every last drop of drama out of
Speaker 1: the story. Several papers had actually assigned their theater critics
Speaker 1: to cover the trial. One of these critics, the Harolds
Speaker 1: Clement Scott, found Roland fascinating. The man he saw, Scott wrote,
Speaker 1: quote is not Roland b. Molineux. It is a false,
Speaker 1: unnatural man Behind this actor's mask. I can see the
Speaker 1: mind of the wretched man working. He is for the
Speaker 1: moment two men, the man as he is and the
Speaker 1: man in the mask. Throughout the trial this mask time slip.
Speaker 1: Roland would burst out in laughter at inappropriate times, or
Speaker 1: even be seen playing Tic tac toe in the middle
Speaker 1: of testimony. Roland's manner wasn't the only strange aspect of
Speaker 1: the trial. Observers were baffled by the way that the
Speaker 1: prosecution presented their case. The order in which Osborne called
Speaker 1: his witnesses, and he would call more than a hundred
Speaker 1: of them, seemed random. Notably, Osborne wouldn't actually establish that
Speaker 1: a murder had occurred until January second, when coroner's physician
Speaker 1: Albert T. Weston testified that Catherine Adams had been poisoned
Speaker 1: with cyanide of mercury. By this point, Roland Molineu's case
Speaker 1: had become the longest most expensive murder trial in New
Speaker 1: York history. In the first weeks of the trial, Osborne
Speaker 1: mainly focused on handwriting analysis, bringing in multiple experts to
Speaker 1: testify that Roland's writing sample matched the writing on the
Speaker 1: medicine request letters and on the poison package. This testimony
Speaker 1: had been so dry and repartitive that even Osborne had
Speaker 1: gotten sick of it, saying aloud, how long, Oh Lord,
Speaker 1: how long. At one point there wasn't much the defense
Speaker 1: could do to undermine these witnesses, although Bartow Weekes did
Speaker 1: his best attacking the handwriting men on unrelated matters, Daniel
Speaker 1: Ames's atheism, for example, or William Kinsley's passion for raising chickens,
Speaker 1: the latter of which made the whole courtroom laugh. There
Speaker 1: were several other interesting moments interspersed throughout. The first came
Speaker 1: on Monday, December eleventh, when a young woman named Mamie
Speaker 1: Milando took the stand. Milando was described in the press
Speaker 1: as Roland's former housekeeper, and that was true, but maybe
Speaker 1: not the full story. Roland had first met Milando in
Speaker 1: eighteen eighty seven, when she was a thirteen year old
Speaker 1: working in his father's New Jersey paint factory. When Roland
Speaker 1: moved to Hermann and Co. He took Milando with him,
Speaker 1: hiring her as a factory foreman and as housekeeper for
Speaker 1: his factory living quarters. Harold Scheckter believes that the two
Speaker 1: may have had a sexual relationship. Milando did not want
Speaker 1: to testify. To avoid the stand, she'd refused to leave
Speaker 1: New Jersey where the New York Police could not get
Speaker 1: to her. She was only here now thanks to some
Speaker 1: highly dubious maneuvering by the NYPD, who had sent two
Speaker 1: undercover officers to take Milando and a friend of hers
Speaker 1: out on a date. After getting the two women drunk,
Speaker 1: the officers suggested a trip to Patterson, New Jersey, by train.
Speaker 1: On the train trip, Milando fell asleep. When she awoke
Speaker 1: and disembarked the train, the lead detectives on Roland's case
Speaker 1: were there to greet her and reveal that she was
Speaker 1: actually now in New York. Milando tried to fight the
Speaker 1: detectives off, but could not. Now on the stand and
Speaker 1: looking deeply uncomfortable, Milando explained that once, while visiting Roland
Speaker 1: at his apartment at the Herman and Co. Factory, she'd
Speaker 1: seen some paper that she liked. She'd liked it so
Speaker 1: much that she'd taken three of the sheets and three
Speaker 1: matching envelopes home with her. She was therefore intimately familiar
Speaker 1: with the stationary, a distinctive set tinted Robin's Egg blue
Speaker 1: with interlocking silver crescents at the top. This was the
Speaker 1: same stationary used to write the forged medicine requests, stationary
Speaker 1: that Roland Molineux had denied ever having seen at the inquest.
Speaker 1: Milando's clear reluctance to testify at one point, when asked
Speaker 1: if she was still friendly with Roland, she started to
Speaker 1: sob only made her testimony more believable to onlookers. After
Speaker 1: the brief excitement of Milando's appearance, the tedious parade of
Speaker 1: handwriting experts resumed. Eventually, Osborne got around to introducing the
Speaker 1: other circumstantial evidence that connected Roland to the crime. Doctor
Speaker 1: Roland Whitthhouse, the forensic chemist, confirmed that the powder in
Speaker 1: the Romo Seltzer bottle was cyanide of mercury, while Carl Tromer,
Speaker 1: a chemical salesman, confirmed that Roland had the raw materials
Speaker 1: to make cyanide of mercury in his lab at the
Speaker 1: paint factory. Joseph Coke and Nicholas Heckman identified Roland as
Speaker 1: the man they'd rented private letterboxes to the case's lead detectives,
Speaker 1: explained how they'd trace the silver bottleholder to Hartigans. Newark
Speaker 1: detective Joseph Ferrell testified to having seen Roland near Hartigan's
Speaker 1: on the day the bottleholder was sold. The prosecution submitted
Speaker 1: the diagnosis form sent to Marston's remedy company, signed as Barnett,
Speaker 1: but filled out with details that matched Roland into evidence.
Speaker 1: This was all important information, but for most observers it
Speaker 1: was also boring. They had read about all of these
Speaker 1: things in the papers months ago. By mid January, though
Speaker 1: coverage of the trial was still robust, interest in the
Speaker 1: trial was fading, but on January fifteenth, testimony from two
Speaker 1: new witnesses woke the tired public right back up. The
Speaker 1: first new witness was named Rachel Green. For several months
Speaker 1: in late eighteen ninety seven and eighteen ninety eight, Green
Speaker 1: had worked as a maid in a boarding house on
Speaker 1: the Upper West Side. While working there, Osborne asked her,
Speaker 1: did you know the defendant? I knew mister and missus Cheeseborough.
Speaker 1: Green responded. Cheeseborough was Blanche Mollinew's maiden name. Do you
Speaker 1: see this mister Cheeseborough in the courtroom, Osborne asked. Rachel
Speaker 1: Green rose from the witness stand and pointed at Roland Molineux.
Speaker 1: That's the gentleman, she said. Roland, for the first time
Speaker 1: in the trial, seemed angry and concerned. Green went on
Speaker 1: to explain how she believed Roland and Blanche to be
Speaker 1: married during this time because Roland regularly spent the night
Speaker 1: in Blanche's room. In truth, the couple wouldn't marry for
Speaker 1: nearly another year. This testimony was certainly scandalous, but what
Speaker 1: did it mean for Roland's guilt? The next witness, Many Betts,
Speaker 1: connected the dots. Betts was also a maid. She worked
Speaker 1: for Alice Bellinger. Bellinger was Blanche's good friend, and Blanche
Speaker 1: had moved in with her after moving out of her
Speaker 1: boarding house. Unlike Green, many Betts had never seen Roland
Speaker 1: Molineu visit Blanche at home. She had, however, seen Henry
Speaker 1: Barnett visit regularly. Judge Goff paused Betts's testimony here to
Speaker 1: ask Osborne about the relevance. Osborne explained that he was
Speaker 1: establishing Roland Molinew's motive for killing Henry Barnett jealousy. But
Speaker 1: the defendant is not on trial for the murder of Barnett,
Speaker 1: Gough reminded the prosecutor. No Osborne acknowledged, but I want
Speaker 1: to show that the man who hated Barnett also hated Cornish.
Speaker 1: We find letters for certain remedies in Barnett's name. We
Speaker 1: also find letters in Cornish's name. This shows the workings
Speaker 1: of the defendant's mind. Barnett died of cyanide of mercury,
Speaker 1: just as Cornish was to have died. It's the same
Speaker 1: sort of plot and as such should be allowed in evidence.
Speaker 1: Goff mouled over this argument, then told Osborne, you may continue.
Speaker 1: So Osborne did, getting more information from many Bets about
Speaker 1: Henry Barnett's frequent visits and overnight stays. This testimony directly
Speaker 1: contradicted Blanche's testimony at the coroner's inquest. On the stand there,
Speaker 1: she had insisted that her relationship with Barnett had been
Speaker 1: purely platonic. The flowers she'd sent him while he was
Speaker 1: dying had been a simple gesture of friendship. She claimed,
Speaker 1: Roland and Barney had never fought over her, despite Betts's
Speaker 1: evidence to the contrary. Blanche would always publicly maintain that
Speaker 1: she and Burnett were not romantically involved. She would only
Speaker 1: admit to their sexual relationship in her private memoir written
Speaker 1: decades later. Throughout the trial, the defense lawyers made a
Speaker 1: point of bringing Blanche in to see her husband. The
Speaker 1: apparently adoring couple would exchange emotional words and kiss and
Speaker 1: embrace for the world to see. Betts's testimony undermined this
Speaker 1: romantic image, and it bolstered James Osborne's case by establishing motive.
Speaker 1: By the time Osborne finally rested his case, observers felt
Speaker 1: the prosecutor had made a strong, circumstantial case against Roland,
Speaker 1: but he had failed to answer a critical question, why
Speaker 1: would Roland want Henry Cornish dead. Osborne had brought in
Speaker 1: some Knickerbocker members to describe the two men's feud, but
Speaker 1: it all seemed so petty, certainly not enough reason to kill,
Speaker 1: so Osborne had injected the Barnet murder in the trial.
Speaker 1: This strategy played to the strengths and weaknesses of each case.
Speaker 1: In the Barnet case, the motive was obvious, but the
Speaker 1: evidence was weaker. Barnett's death had originally been thought to
Speaker 1: be from natural causes, so the police were a month
Speaker 1: behind in investigating it. In the Adams case, on the
Speaker 1: other hand, the motive was murkier, but the evidence was clearer. However,
Speaker 1: Roland Malaneu hadn't been charged with Henry Barnett's murder, and
Speaker 1: some newspapers commented on this. Would this strategy come back
Speaker 1: to bite the prosecution? James Osborne would have to wait
Speaker 1: and see. On February fifth, nearly three months after the
Speaker 1: trial began, he rested the state's case. People eagerly anticipated
Speaker 1: the presentation of the defense case. What witnesses would the
Speaker 1: defense call? Would Roland Malanu testify in his own defense?
Speaker 1: What about his glamorous wife Blanche. On February sixth, defense
Speaker 1: lawyer Bartow Weeks stood to speak. He looked strangely, uneasy, pale,
Speaker 1: and strained. He had good reason, because Bartow Weeks was
Speaker 1: about to say something shocking, something that would change the
Speaker 1: course of the trial and Roland Molineux's life. Just what
Speaker 1: did bartow Weeks say? Well, you'll have to come back
Speaker 1: next week to find out in Part two of New
Speaker 1: York v. Roland Molineu. But before you go, stay with
Speaker 1: me after the break for a surprising connection between this
Speaker 1: trial and a famous political scandal. Although Bartow Weeks with
Speaker 1: the lead defense attorney in Roland Molinu's trial, he didn't
Speaker 1: work alone. Weeks was assisted throughout by his law partner
Speaker 1: George Gordon. Battle. Battle, then thirty years old, was in
Speaker 1: the early years of what would become a distinguished law career.
Speaker 1: Born in North Carolina, Battle had come to New York
Speaker 1: to attend Columbia Law School. After graduating, he joined the
Speaker 1: District Attorney's office, where he worked for five years before
Speaker 1: going into private practice with Bartow Weeks. A brilliant lawyer,
Speaker 1: Battle would win a number of major cases, both civil
Speaker 1: and criminal. Battle was also known for his civic leadership.
Speaker 1: He chaired numerous committees, including the National Committee on Prison
Speaker 1: Labor Reform and New York City's Parks and Playgrounds Association.
Speaker 1: A devout episcopal, Battle also fought for religious freedom. His
Speaker 1: work against anti Semitism was so important that the prominent
Speaker 1: Jewish newspaper, the American Hebrew, awarded him a medal for
Speaker 1: keeping the flame of religious hatred from searing American democracy.
Speaker 1: He raised money for a variety of causes, including the
Speaker 1: Salvation Army and the one hundred and fiftieth anniversary celebration
Speaker 1: of the American Revolution. Battle's generosity extended to those around him.
Speaker 1: In nineteen seventeen or eighteen, he hired a high school
Speaker 1: student named Seymour as a law clerk. Seymour had had
Speaker 1: a difficult childhood. His hot tempered father had trouble keeping
Speaker 1: a job, particularly after he fell ill with cancer, leaving
Speaker 1: young Seymour to support his parents and older sister. Seymour
Speaker 1: got a job loading freight for a railroad, hard dangerous
Speaker 1: work for a fifteen year old. His co workers at
Speaker 1: the loading docks, recognizing Seymour's intelligence, incur uraged him to
Speaker 1: apply for scholarships. Soon enough, Seymour won a place at
Speaker 1: a preparatory school in Newark. He kept working in the
Speaker 1: loading docks while at school, continuing the job even after
Speaker 1: he was hired as a law clerk by George Gordon Battle.
Speaker 1: Battle was so impressed by Seymour's intellect and work ethic
Speaker 1: that he increased his pay, allowing Seymour to finally quit
Speaker 1: the railroad job. Not long after, Battle offered to pay
Speaker 1: for Seymour's college education. Seymour graduated from Fordham and then
Speaker 1: from Fordham Law. Soon enough, just like his mentor, Seymour
Speaker 1: was a prominent and successful lawyer. When Seymour's first child
Speaker 1: was born, he saw an opportunity to honor all that
Speaker 1: Battle had done for him, so he named his son,
Speaker 1: George Gordon Battle. Battle's namesake would go by Gordon, and
Speaker 1: he would one day become more famous than his father
Speaker 1: and his namesake combined, although not necessarily for the right
Speaker 1: reasons for this little baby would grow up to be
Speaker 1: none other than g. Gordon Liddy, best known today for
Speaker 1: his role in organizing the nineteen seventy two burglary of
Speaker 1: the Democratic National Committee headquarters at the Watergate Office Building.
Speaker 1: Thank you for listening to History on Trial. If you
Speaker 1: enjoy this episode, please consider leaving a rating or review.
Speaker 1: It can help new listeners find the show. My main
Speaker 1: sources for this episode were Harold Scheckter's book The Devil's Gentlemen, Privilege,
Speaker 1: Poison and The Trial That Ushered in the twentieth century,
Speaker 1: as well as newspaper coverage of the trial. For complete bibliography,
Speaker 1: as well as a transcript of the episode with citations,
Speaker 1: please visit our website History on Trial podcast dot com.
Speaker 1: History on Trial is written and hosted by me Mira Hayward.
Speaker 1: The show is edited and produced by Jesse Funk, with
Speaker 1: supervising producer Trevor Young and executive producers Dana Schwartz, Alexander Williams,
Speaker 1: Matt Frederick, and Mira Hayward. Learn more about the show
Speaker 1: at History on Trial podcast dot com and follow us
Speaker 1: on Instagram at History on Trial and on Twitter at
Speaker 1: Underscore History on Trial. Find more podcasts from iHeartRadio by
Speaker 1: visiting the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen
Speaker 1: to your favorite shows.