OPENING FOR THE STATE.--THE EVIDENCE REVIEWED--A MASTERLY ARGUMENT BY
STATE'S ATTORNEY LONGENECKER--TRACING THE PLOT FROM ITS INCEPTION TO THE
MURDER--AN APPEAL FOR JUSTICE--ARGUMENTS FOR THE DEFENSE--DONAHOE, WING,
FOSTER AND FORREST MAKE THEIR FINAL PLEAS FOR THE PRISONERS, AND INGHAM,
HYNES AND LONGENECKER CLOSE FOR THE STATE.
State's Attorney Longenecker was on his feet the moment the witness had
left the stand. It was apparent that the State was determined to push
the remainder of the proceedings with all possible speed. The prisoners
looked anxious; the vast audience expectant.
"You may proceed," said Judge McConnell, and clearing his throat, the
State's Attorney commenced a memorable address.
He spoke as follows:
"If the Court please, Gentlemen of the Jury, I want to talk to you
about this case, about the evidence which you have been hearing
from the witnesses. I shall not attempt to talk to any one except
you twelve men, because you are now interested in the case and it
is your duty to come to a correct conclusion. The responsibility
rests upon you after we have done our work. I have no doubt that
you twelve men are competent to render such a verdict in this case
as will meet the demands of the law. I have no doubt that you are
prepared on this evidence to render such a verdict as the evidence
warrants you in rendering. Now, I say to you this, that I shall
confine myself to the evidence in the case. My associates will
attend to the arguments and make the speeches. I want now to
express my feeling of gratitude to you for your patience during the
hearing of the evidence. It is due to you, gentlemen; it is a
sacrifice that you, I hope, will never be called upon to make
again. To be taken from your homes and be shut up for weeks and
months is no little sacrifice. You have had reason, perhaps, to
complain of us; you have had reason to complain because of the
slowness of the case; and yet, after all, we felt it our duty to do
what we have done. We felt that we could not in any way shorten the
proceedings and yet do justice to the case. I hope that none of you
will harbor any feeling against any one in this case on account of
delays.
"Again, gentlemen, you are twelve men here listening from day to
day to the evidence; this case has strung out from day to day and
from week to week, until it has become a great case. It has become
a noted case to you--a case that you will never forget. It has
grown as the days have passed by. Very often jurors, courts and
lawyers, when a case grows and there is evidence piling up, forget
that it requires some evidence to reach a conclusion, more of it
than if it was a small case. Do not be led into this error of
determining what you shall do. The evidence of conspiracy is the
same for a small offense as it is for a great offense. The evidence
of conspiracy to obtain dollars and cents from you or me or any one
else must be just as strong, although it only takes two hours to
try the case, as if you are trying men for murder. What I am trying
to have you understand is this: that because it has been so long
and has grown so large, you must not think that it requires more
evidence on that account. If the evidence convinces you of the
guilt of these men, then it matters not whether there are five men
or ten men on trial or only one man. The evidence necessary to
convince you beyond a doubt of the guilt of the men on trial should
be just as strong as if there were twenty men on trial. The law is
always just. It is made to protect the innocent as well as punish
the guilty.
"After you have heard the arguments from counsel on both sides,
having heard the evidence and instructions of the Court, you will
go into your room and make up your verdict and bear in mind that
the law itself is just; if the law compels you to inflict a penalty
here that you do not like to inflict, remember that you are not to
blame and the law is not to blame; it is the men who have violated
the law. What I say to you in this case is from a feeling that we
wish to get at the truth; what I say will be said with a view of
getting at a truthful verdict and nothing else. I have no feeling
against these men on trial personally. Why should I stand up here
and ask you to convict Martin Burke, Daniel Coughlin, Patrick
O'Sullivan, John F. Beggs and John Kunze unless I believe the
evidence justified me in asking you to do it? If I should at this
moment ask you twelve men to convict them upon anything else but
the evidence, I would not be fit to fill the position that I now
occupy. We do not desire that these men shall be 'guessed' guilty.
We do not desire that they shall be convicted upon doubtful
evidence. We do not desire that they shall be convicted upon
anything except the law and the evidence in the case; but if you do
believe that that law and that evidence satisfies your mind of
their guilt, then we do demand at your hands that your verdict
shall be in accordance with the law and the evidence, and nothing
short of a truthful verdict under the law and the evidence will
meet the demands of this case, whether the verdict be to acquit the
defendants or whether it be to convict the defendants; with that
verdict the people represented by myself and my associates must be
content."
REVIEWING THE EVIDENCE.
"Now, gentlemen, as I said, we want to talk about the evidence in
the case. I will do it as hastily as possible, bearing in mind at
the same time that it is necessary that it be presented to you in
such a way as you will see the chain that has been forged from day
to day in this case, and so that you may be enabled from this
evidence to come to a correct conclusion. I shall not attempt to go
over all the evidence, that is all the details, because I apprehend
that you men have watched this evidence as closely as I have; but
what I intend to say to you regarding the evidence will be such as
I think should be mentioned to enable you to come to a correct
conclusion, and I will leave pieces of evidence here and there to
be remembered by yourselves.
"Again, gentlemen, if I should misstate this evidence, I hope that
the attorneys for the defense will call my attention to it; and I
hope it will not be charged that I am trying to take any unfair
advantage of these men who are upon trial for their lives. As I
said to you in my opening of this case, we contend that the murder
of Patrick Henry Cronin was brought about by a conspiracy. We claim
that it was acted upon and executed. And that these men on trial
are parties to the conspiracy, together with others who are not on
trial. That is our position. We further claim that it was a
cold-blooded conspiracy; a conspiracy that is without parallel,
coldly and deliberately planned; a conspiracy that, as we
understand it from the evidence, would chill the blood in the
warmest heart; a conspiracy that is most terrible in its effects.
If such a conspiracy as this has existed, as we know it has
existed, and if the murder has been the result of such a conspiracy
as this, then it follows that it must have been planned for weeks
and weeks before its execution; and if that be true, then,
gentlemen, you must notice the line of evidence in the case in
order to come to a correct conclusion. A conspiracy always
originates somewhere; one man can not conspire, two men may
conspire; oftener three men conspire, and it is easier to commit a
crime where two men are engaged in working it out in different
ways, engaged in bringing about in different ways the same results,
than where the same object is aimed to be accomplished by one man.
Now, it is not necessary, as the Court will instruct you, that we
prove that the parties got together and talked the matter over and
arranged it; that is not necessary; the law does not require that;
we don't need to prove that they ever came together. If that was so
it would be very seldom that a prosecutor could obtain a conviction
in a conspiracy case. Remember this is a charge of murder, brought
about by a conspiracy, and we claim that this evidence shows
conclusively that a conspiracy was concocted by these defendants on
trial. Let us see where we go to start in. Where do we learn of
this conspiracy first?"
CAMP 20'S MYSTERIOUS MEETINGS.
"You remember that there is a Camp 20 in this city. It is proven
here that the Clan-na-Gael organization has a camp called Camp 20,
also named Columbia Club; that they met in North Side Turner Hall,
and that before the date of which I now intend to speak there had
been a division in this organization, and that the two factions had
united, after which the numbers had been changed, so that this Camp
96 had become Camp 20. I will also ask you to remember that before
this reunion of these two organizations, or these two factions of
the organization, a trial committee was appointed to try the
ex-executive body of this organization; that this ex-executive was
to be tried by a committee to be selected at a convention that met
in this city last year in the month of June. You will remember that
Dr. P. H. Cronin was one of the members appointed on that trial
committee, and that after that trial committee had acted, the two
factions were united and the camps were renumbered. I speak of
that, and I want you to bear it in mind, that Dr. Cronin was on
that committee, and that it was shown that there were three men
called trianglers who were being tried by the committee of which
Dr. Cronin was a member. Now we will stop there, and go to this
Camp 20, on the 8th day of February. You go into that camp. We call
the secretary here, John F. O'Connor, and he testifies that on that
occasion, the night of the 8th of February, one Andrew Foy made a
speech. O'Connor can not remember what Foy said, but he tells you
that there were resolutions passed, and that he does recollect that
Thomas F. O'Connor made a speech there. He tells you that Thomas F.
O'Connor had charged that a certain report of the trial committee,
this trial committee to which I have already called your attention,
and of which Dr. Cronin was a member, was read in another camp.
Secretary O'Connor tells you that Thomas F. O'Connor said he had
heard the report of that trial committee read. That is about all
that this man could remember, except that some one jumped up and
demanded to know how it was that some camps had got the reports of
this trial committee before others. He did not pretend to know what
Foy had said in his speech, but he did recollect that some
resolution was passed in regard to the matter.
"We next called Andrew J. Foy. Andrew J. Foy testifies here that he
did make a speech; that he did say that he understood there were
parties getting into the camp who were other Le Carons; that there
were other Le Carons in this country; that there were spies in this
country and in the organization. He admits that in his testimony,
and he further said that they ought to be more careful in admitting
members into the organization and not to admit parties of this kind
into the organization. Then it was that Thomas F. O'Connor made his
speech and said they had better look after the ex-executive if they
wanted to find out the traitors who had been squandering the funds
of the order and sending honest, patriotic men to English prisons.
And thereupon you are told four or five men jumped to their feet
and a motion or suggestion was made to have a secret committee
appointed. What for? [State's Attorney Longenecker paused when he
asked this question and for a moment gazed silently and earnestly
into the jurors' faces.] What for?" he repeated. "Not to get a
report of the trial committee, not to find out what it was that was
contained in this report, but to see why this report was made in
this other camp and who it was had made it. We called Michael J.
Kelly, another member of that organization, a junior guardian in
Camp 20, and what does he say? You must remember that these three
witnesses were not what might be called willing witnesses. These
three witnesses that were first called here upon the stand were
unwilling witnesses for the people; but we called them. We called
Michael Kelly to the stand, and he remembers that a speech was made
by Foy, and he remembered that Thomas F. O'Connor made a speech,
and that Le Caron's name perhaps was mentioned, but he does not
remember much about it. He does tell you, however, that Thomas F.
O'Connor stated that he had heard Dr. Cronin read that report in
his, Dr. Cronin's, camp. That is about all we got out of him. We
then called to the stand Anthony J. Ford, who was very fair in the
witness stand, and he goes on and tells you that Andrew Foy made a
speech, but he does not remember very much about Foy's speech. He
also remembers that Thomas F. O'Connor made a speech in reply to
that, and he tells you here in reference to that matter. We called
Stephen Colleran here, a friend of Burke's, and he remembered and
tells you that he heard some remarks made by Andrew Foy, and he
also heard the speech made by Thomas O'Connor, and he recollects
that three or four talked of the appointment of a committee to
investigate the matter alluded to in O'Connor's speech, but whether
it was a secret committee or not he does not remember."
PURPOSE OF THE SECRET COMMITTEE.
"You will bear that in mind in regard to Colleran, because I shall
not go into details with his evidence on this particular point, as
he touches another line of evidence in the case. Then Denis
O'Connor was called here, who says that he has belonged to the
order for fifteen or sixteen years, and he testifies that it was
charged in Camp 20, at that meeting to which I have referred, that
Dr. Cronin had read a report of the trial committee; he says Foy
had made a speech, that Captain O'Connor had replied to him in
another speech, and that he understood that a committee was
appointed. What for?" again exclaimed the State's Attorney, with
considerable emphasis. "To go up to visit Dr. Cronin's camp, he
says, for the purpose of ascertaining why he read this report in
his, Dr. Cronin's, camp. That we find in the record, gentlemen,
there is no dispute on that point. You will remember that these men
swear to that fact, men who were not willing witnesses for the
prosecution; they swear that they understood it was to investigate
Dr. Cronin and his camp as to why he in that camp had read a report
of that committee before which the charges had been tried before
the ex-executive body. That is from the mouth of Denis O'Connor.
But he tells you that he did not understand it to be a secret
committee, but we called other witnesses on this same point."
Mr. Foster at this point broke in with an interruption. He called
the State's Attorney's attention to the fact that the record will
show that Denis O'Connor had not said that the committee had been
appointed to investigate why the report had been read, but to find
out if a minority report had been read there, and, if so, what it
was.
State's Attorney Longenecker asserted that he was correct in his
statement of the evidence. Mr. Foster, no doubt, on
cross-examination had made a speech to Denis O'Connor, and asked
him if that was not so, and Denis said yes; but he had stated
directly the testimony of the witness on direct examination. "After
Denis O'Connor testified," continued State's Attorney Longenecker,
"we called to the stand Henry Owen O'Connor. He testifies that he
was there, and heard a discussion between Captain O'Connor and Foy,
and he tells you that there was something said about a committee,
and that he offered an amendment thereto. We have the resolution
read here before you by the secretary. Henry Owen O'Connor says,
however, that he left soon after, and he did not know that a
committee had been appointed until afterward. I shall speak of the
evidence of this witness in relation to another matter, and to
other meetings, later on. I shall now read to you the evidence of
the next witness whom we called in the case, Thomas F. O'Connor."
The State's Attorney then read the evidence of Thomas F. O'Connor,
as already published, relating to a speech made by Andrew Foy in
Camp 20 on the night of February 6, and his reply thereto, in which
he had made the now famous assertion that he had heard the report
of the Buffalo trial committee, and that he knew that the
ex-executive had squandered the funds of the organization and sent
its members to prison, and finally Coughlin's motion to appoint a
secret committee to investigate the reading of the report in
Cronin's camp.
THE MEETING OF FEB. 8.
The State's Attorney, resuming, said: "The next man we called to
the stand was John Collins. He, too, tells you that he remembers
Foy's speech and O'Connor's speech, and that a secret committee was
ordered appointed. On that point, gentlemen, we have ten witnesses,
all of whom have testified in regard to the call for the
appointment of a secret committee on the night of Feb. 8. That was
the night when this conspiracy began. Remember that Foy had made
his speech claiming that there were spies in the order, and
charging that there were other Le Carons in the country. Following
that O'Connor had made his speech on the other side, the two
factions had met. Thomas O'Connor had stated that the ex-executive
body had squandered the funds, that they had put patriotic men
behind prison bars, and that the camp had better give their
attention to the executive body than to any statements regarding
spies or Le Carons in the country. Denis O'Connor, Kelly, Ford and
others all agree in telling you that it was in Dr. Cronin's camp,
or in reference to Dr. Cronin's camp, that these remarks had been
made."
The State's Attorney then called the attention of the jurors to the
resolution passed on that occasion, and which had been read by the
secretary from the witness-stand. He also called attention to the
amendment proposed by Henry F. O'Connor to that resolution. The
motion called for an imperative demand for action by the district
officer, and the amendment was that the district officer's
attention be called to it and asking for instructions. The State's
Attorney, continuing, said, he would wish to direct the attention
of the jury to the evidence bearing upon the utterances of Patrick
O'Sullivan, a member of the Lake View camp.
They had it on the testimony of A. J. Ford that Patrick O'Sullivan
had charged that in Lake View they were taking in deputies. He had
charged that they had taken in men who belonged to what was called
the Union Order of Deputies, and in statements made that night in
Camp 20 to the same effect. Mr. Ford and others had given Patrick
O'Sullivan as authority on that subject. It was in evidence here
that Dr. Cronin had organized a camp in Lake View, to which this
man, O'Sullivan, also belonged, and in the organization of which he
had taken part; there was no evidence here that any other camp was
organized in Lake View except the Washington Literary Society, and
this was the camp, Cronin's camp, into which Patrick O'Sullivan had
charged that members of the United Order of Deputies were being
admitted. It was upon this statement of O'Sullivan's that Ford's
speech was founded, and that he made this statement that he feared
the organization would be broken up.
Mr. Longenecker then alluded to and read the resolution passed on
this subject.
"Now," continued the State's Attorney, "Captain O'Connor has taken
the stand here--and the defense did not dare to cross-examine
Captain O'Connor upon that proposition--and swore that the motion
to appoint a secret committee was made by Daniel Coughlin. The
defense did not dare to put a witness upon the stand to swear that
that motion was made by any other person than Daniel Coughlin, and
that statement stands here uncontradicted. He swears that Daniel
Coughlin arose and moved that a secret committee be appointed. Now,
in all organizations where a committee is moved, the mover is made
chairman of the committee. If any of you ever belonged to an
organization, and if you ever do belong to an organization, you
will know that when a motion is made for the appointment of a
committee, if the man in the chair understands parliamentary rules,
he makes the mover for a committee chairman of the committee. Bear
that in mind. In this case Captain O'Connor says that Dan Coughlin
moved that this secret committee be appointed and that Thomas
Murphy, who did not dare take the stand, seconded that motion.
Thomas Murphy, you will remember, gentlemen, is the treasurer of
the organization. Daniel Coughlin moved, and it was seconded, that
a committee of two or three be appointed by the senior guardian to
investigate this statement of Captain F. O'Connor. Why was this
investigating committee appointed? Denis O'Connor and others tell
you that it was known at the time that Dr. Cronin was the man who
had read the report of that trial committee. They all knew that
Cronin had acted as a member of that committee, they knew he had a
separate report, the minority report; that he had condemned this
executive body; that he had charged the funds of the organization
had been squandered; then, for what purpose, I ask again, was the
appointment of this committee proposed?"
The State's Attorney again impressed upon the jury the fact that
Daniel Coughlin had for years been a personal enemy of Dr. Cronin,
the man whom it was proposed to investigate, and that this same
Coughlin, who so hated Cronin, was the man who had called for the
appointment of a secret committee to find out just what it was
admitted they all knew at the time. It had been claimed by counsel
for the defense, and it no doubt would be claimed that this
committee was not appointed to try Dr. Cronin.
THE MURDER OF DR. CRONIN.
"Of course they were not appointed to try him, gentlemen,"
exclaimed Mr. Longenecker, vehemently, "and they never did try him,
for they never gave him a chance for his life. We don't contend
they even went through the formality of a trial, but that this
committee was appointed; that it acted; and that the result of its
action was the removal of Dr. Cronin, we have no doubt. Now
gentlemen," continued the State's Attorney, "the learned counsel
who has more exceptions, and 'I object,' and 'wait a minute' in the
record than he has evidence of the innocence of his clients, said
that I was very tenacious about dates. I am. He called your
attention to the fact that I had stated in my opening speech that
dates would cut a figure in this case. They will. This was on the
8th day of February that this committee was ordered, and this, mark
you, on the motion of a man who was an enemy of Dr. Cronin. The
records, as shown by Patrick Henry O'Connor, show that Martin Burke
was there, Patrick Cooney was there, John F. Beggs was there, and
all these defendants on trial except P. O'Sullivan and Kunze. The
record shows that. And now, before I forget it, remember, because I
don't want to neglect defendant Kunze in this case, remember that
if a conspiracy has been organized to do a certain thing--if there
is a conspiracy to do a certain crime--whoever shall have joined
that conspiracy has become a party to it, and they are bound by the
acts committed prior to their joining the conspiracy and are
involved in it as much going in the last hour as if they went in
the first hour."
HISTORY OF THE CONSPIRACY.
"Now on this occasion, on the 8th day of February, we have Martin
Burke, Daniel Coughlin, John F. Beggs, all present at this meeting,
and on this night also Martin Burke was appointed a committee of
one, as shown by the secretary's books, to pass upon the
qualifications of Danahy's bartender (who swears to an alibi for
Burke) for admission into the order. They were getting in their
friends then. This was on the 8th of February. On the 16th of
February John F. Beggs, senior guardian of this camp, wrote a
letter to Spelman, the district officer, and on the 17th of
February Spelman, the district officer, answers that letter, in
which he says he knows of no authority under the constitution that
authorizes him to inflict a penalty on a member who has committed
the offense referred to by Beggs. Recollect, gentlemen, they talk
about penalties; that he knows nothing in the constitution by which
he is authorized to inflict a penalty. From these letters it will
be seen that Mr. Senior Guardian Beggs had directed Spelman's
attention to Dr. Cronin's camp, showing that he knew that it was in
Cronin's camp that this minority report had been read, and to
'investigate' which the secret committee had been proposed by
Coughlin. On the 18th of February John F. Beggs writes (and I will
read you the letter) that he does not know of any 'written' law of
the organization which authorizes the infliction of a penalty. On
the 19th day of February Mr. Simonds appears and rents a flat and
furniture is bought, and on the 20th the carpet is nailed down in
the room on Clark street. 'Dates will cut a figure in this case.'
This was all done in the month of February. On the night of the 22d
of February this man (Coughlin), who moved to appoint that secret
committee, already beginning his work as chairman of the committee,
tells Henry Owen O'Connor that they have another Le Caron, and he
says he has got it from good authority that it was Dr. Cronin who
was the spy among them, and Mr. O'Connor would not hear any more
and left him."
At this point Mr. Longenecker's attention was called by associate
counsel for the defense to the fact that the words of Coughlin
alluded to occurred on March 1 and not on February 22, and he made
the necessary correction.
THE BEGGS-SPELMAN LETTERS.
"Now," continued Mr. Longenecker, "let us see whether there is
anything else shown by these letters that passed between Beggs and
Spelman. In the first place let us ask ourselves what was there to
write about to Spelman if the object of the whole 'investigation'
arising out of Thomas O'Connor's speech was to find out 'why'
Cronin had read that minority report. There was no need to make any
fuss about that. But suppose they wanted to create the belief that
there was in the organization a man who was a spy or traitor, and
that they wanted an excuse for killing him--that would be a very
different matter."
The State's Attorney then proceeded to read to the jury the first
letter written by Beggs to Spelman, dated Feb. 16. In this letter
Beggs says: "It is charged that the senior guardian of Columbus
Camp, at a recent meeting, to the assembled brothers read the
proceedings of the trial of the executive at Buffalo." Mr.
Longenecker compared this passage of Beggs' letter with the motion
of Henry Owen O'Connor, carried by Camp 20, directing the senior
guardian to notify the district officer "of the report going around
regarding reports of the trial committee being read in one of the
camps of this city."
"That motion was carried by the camp," said Mr. Longenecker, "but
it seems that Mr. Beggs had found out what camp that report had
been read in and all about it before he wrote as directed to Mr.
Spelman."
Having alluded passingly to the passage in Beggs' letter protesting
against the initiation of members into camps before their names
were presented to Camp 20 and the central officers for
ratification, which he said was in line with O'Sullivan's charge
that U. O. D. men were being admitted to Cronin's camp, Mr.
Longenecker took up Spelman's reply to this letter of Beggs. In
this letter, which was dated Feb. 17, Spelman asked Beggs to refer
him to that section of the law by which he was empowered to inflict
a penalty on a senior guardian for disclosing the proceedings of a
trial committee.
In this letter also Mr. Beggs refers to "certain men who want to
lead in Irish affairs" as "scamps," and says he "is disgusted with
their conduct." The reply of Beggs to this letter, dated February
18, was then read. In this Beggs says he knows of no "written law"
under which a penalty could be inflicted for the offense alluded to
in his first letter. "No man in his right senses," he declared,
"would deny that such conduct was prejudicial to the good of the
order." Mr. Beggs in this letter also deplores the "opening of the
old sore," and says that as the majority of the members believed
"the parties charged to be innocent," created ill feeling and
blasted the hopes of the friends of Irish unity. Beggs also said he
would not notice the matter alluded to, as he thought it better not
to notice such matters, only he was ordered to do so by the vote of
the camp. "But I am only one man," said Beggs, "but the men who are
in power will in time realize the motives of those who are
continually breeding disorder in the ranks. I am very much
discouraged at the present outlook, but hope no trouble will result
in the meantime."
Mr. Longenecker asked significantly what Beggs was talking about in
this latter portion of his letter. A comparison of his utterances
with the evidence of Thomas F. and Henry Owen O'Connor showed that
Beggs was referring to Cronin, and to the report which he had read
in his own camp, charging the ex-executives with being thieves and
robbers and with putting Irishmen behind English prison bars. What
did Spelman mean when he said he had hoped for a reunion and for
better results? To whom did Beggs refer when he spoke of "these men
who are continually breeding disorder in the ranks?" It was evident
that they were talking about Cronin.
"On the 22d of February," continued the State's Attorney, "when
Patrick McGarry made the same charge that this ex-executive was
composed of thieves and robbers, at the reunion meeting John F.
Beggs stood up and said he would not submit to any such charges
being made in his camp, and he slapped his breast and thanked God
that he was a friend of Alexander Sullivan's.
"On the 19th of February, Throckmorton said the man named Simonds
came there and inquired and rented the flat at 117 Clark street.
Now we have a meeting on February 22d. You recollect what Patrick
McGarry stated at that meeting, and, for the purpose of showing you
just what he did say, I would like to read from the record, but,
after glancing through the papers on the table, I fear I have
neglected to bring it from my office."
Judge Longenecker had now spoken for over four hours, and a recess was
ordered until ten o'clock on the following morning (November 30), and at
that hour the State's Attorney resumed his speech, as follows:
"If the Court please, and Gentlemen, Mr. Foster was right in regard
to my statement about Spelman. It had reference to the circular
letter which he said was not addressed originally to Beggs, and
that evidence had nothing to do with this case.
"On yesterday evening I wanted to call your attention to what was
said and done on the meeting of the 22d of February--this reunion.
You remember that Mr. Beggs spoke of it in his letter to Spelman;
not to forget their reunion. At that meeting speeches were made by
different parties, and among them Patrick McGarry made a speech,
and John F. Beggs, the senior guardian of Camp 20, answered that
speech. You may not remember just what was said on that occasion. I
will now read just what Patrick McGarry said about it."
Judge Longenecker proceeded to read from a typewritten manuscript
the testimony of Patrick McGarry as to what occurred at the meeting
of Camp 20 on Feb. 22.
"'Four gentlemen had spoken,' Mr. McGarry testified, and referred
to the unity that ought to exist in the organization. It was about
the time that Le Caron had testified before the Parnell commission
in England and the other gentlemen had referred to spies getting
into the organization. On the 8th day of February, on the occasion
of moving the appointment of the committee, Foy talked about spies
in the organization. Mr. McGarry spoke of how Irishmen coming to
this country and becoming American citizens ought to educate their
children. That was good talk. How they should educate them first in
the principles of American institutions; that was good. How they
should educate them also to have love for their mothers and fathers
and forefathers' homes; that there was nothing in the Irish race
and nothing in Irish history that Irishmen should be ashamed of in
America; that is true."
The State's Attorney proceeded to recite the testimony of McGarry,
as before published, in regard to the speech that he had made at
this celebrated reunion meeting at Camp 20.
"'I said I agreed in my remarks with what all three gentlemen had
said. I said it was all very well to talk of unity, and I wanted to
see unity among Irish people; that there could not be unity while
the members of this organization would meet on dark streets and
back alleys to villify and abuse a man who had the courage to stand
up and attack the treachery and robbery of the triangle. I said
that I was educating children, and as long as God allowed me to be
over them, I would educate them first in American principles, and I
also wanted to educate them that, if they got an opportunity to
strike a blow for Ireland's freedom, they would do so. I told them
that I had been investigating Le Caron's record, and I said there
were men in this organization that were worse than Le Caron. I said
that the man who gave Le Caron his credentials to go into the
convention was a greater scoundrel than ever Le Caron could pretend
to be. I said that I had found out that Le Caron's camp did not
exist for two years, and they did not have a meeting, and the
junior guardian, as given in the directory down in Braidwood, had
been for a year at Spring Valley, and I said that they must have
known that such a camp could not exist only on paper.'"
Judge Longenecker went on to review the testimony of McGarry in
reference to this famous meeting, and next called the attention of
the jury to the conduct of John F. Beggs, the senior guardian of
Camp 20, on that occasion.
VIOLATIONS OF CAMP RULES.
"'Now remember,' he said, 'that Alexander Sullivan's name had not
been mentioned; the triangle had not been mentioned, and John F.
Beggs said that visiting members were coming in there and violating
the hospitality of the camp, and that would have to be
stopped--that it was cowardly,' and, says McGarry: 'I wanted to
interrupt him, but the presiding officer and chairman at that time
would not let me interrupt him.' When he used the word coward, he
said that they came in there talking about Alexander Sullivan, and
it was cowardly, and he said that they talked about a man behind
his back; 'why don't they say it to his face?' He said that
Alexander Sullivan had strong friends in that camp, and he slapped
his breast and said that he 'was one of them.' That was Beggs'
speech on the 22d of February--this same senior guardian, who was
called upon to appoint a secret committee to investigate why Dr.
Cronin had read a minority report in his camp charging Alexander
Sullivan and the rest of the triangle with squandering the funds.
On this occasion it was admitted that Alexander Sullivan was not a
member of the organization, but he was and had been a member of the
executive body--a member of the triangle--and Beggs having
mentioned his name in his speech, McGarry had charged this
corruption, and then it was that this man Beggs said he would not
submit to it, and that it was cowardly for them to talk about it.
He said that Alexander Sullivan had strong friends in that camp,
and he slapped his breast and said: 'I am one of them,' 'I wanted
to get the floor to reply to him,' said McGarry; 'I said the
gentleman had said it was cowardly, and I wanted him to understand
that I was no coward; that I would tell Alexander Sullivan either
there or on any other ground what my opinion of him was, and that
every man who knew me knew what Pat was. I said, Why did you
mention Alexander Sullivan's name? I have not mentioned it; I have
not heard it mentioned here until the senior guardian of this camp
mentioned it. I have said, and I repeat, that the man who gave Le
Caron his credentials is a greater scoundrel than Le Caron could
ever pretend to be. I said I did not mention his name until it was
brought out, and then John F. Beggs said that Alexander Sullivan
had strong friends in the camp, and he was one of them, and that he
was for union and unity among Irish people if it took war to bring
it about.'
"Now this occurred on the 22d of February. The senior guardian was
then defending the triangle. Dr. Cronin had been charging the
triangle with misappropriation of the funds--and what else? He had
been charging them with worse than murder. He had been charging
that they not only robbed the treasury, but that they had sent
innocent men to English prisons; that they had sent men behind the
bars in order to protect their own thievery. He had charged upon
this triangle, as Thomas O'Connor stated in his speech, in his
minority report which he had read to his camp, the scoundrelism of
these men; and here we find this senior guardian"--and the State's
Attorney turned round and pointed to Beggs--"on the 22d of February
defending them and saying that they had friends and he was glad to
say that he was one of them. Now, gentlemen, remember that this was
on the 22d day of February, two days after the carpet had been
nailed down in the flat at 117 Clark street; five days after the
notorious letter that the senior guardian had written Spelman to
find out something that he knew all about--writing to this district
member to investigate a matter that he knew all about."
THE CONNECTION WITH THE MURDER.
"What else? We find that on the following meeting on the 1st of
March--it is in evidence here by Henry Owen O'Connor--that as he
was leaving the hall, Daniel Coughlin, the chairman of the
committee, followed him into the ante room, and said to Henry Owen
O'Connor, 'there are other Le Carons here among us.' He knew how
Henry Owen O'Connor's heart went out to Ireland. He knew how
patriotism burned in his heart; he knew that Henry Owen O'Connor
was loyal to his people. He thought by prejudicing him in that
direction he would surround their action with another friend. What
does he do? He says 'it is rumored around that there is another Le
Caron, and we have got it pretty straight that it is Dr. Cronin.'
This was on the 1st day of March, on Friday night.
"Singular, is it not? Here on the 8th day of February, the date on
which the motion was made for that committee--on the 16th of
February the senior guardian writing about it and on the 17th
writing about it; on the 19th renting the flat; on the 20th nailing
the carpet down, and on the 22d defending the triangle, and on the
1st of March this man, who is on trial now for his life, says that
Dr. Cronin is a spy. Why was this done? Why should he tell that he
was a spy? Following along on the same line it was uttered on
February 8 that there were spies in the camp; on the 22d they
talked about spies, and now it was whispered into the ears of Henry
Owen O'Connor that this man, Cronin, was a spy. They knew how the
Irish people despised a man who was pointed out as a spy,
therefore, he began his work of prejudicing the minds of those
Irishmen who were in earnest in reference to the freedom of
Ireland, and tells O'Connor that Cronin was a spy, but Henry Owen
O'Connor turned on his heel and would not have it and said: 'I
don't believe it,' and walked away. Now, what do we find? We find
this: That a conspiracy began in Camp 20 on the 8th of February.
Following that, as I stated, were the remarks made by this man
Coughlin, and remarks by Beggs. Now, we go on to another meeting in
this camp. Was that committee appointed? I stated on yesterday that
we did not contend that it was a trial committee. We never have
contended that it was wanted for the purpose of trying Dr. Cronin
or any one else; no such statement has been made, but that there
was a request for a secret committee, is undisputed.
"Now was it appointed? We find that either on the 3d of May or on
the 10th--that does not matter--one of the witnesses, I think Henry
Owen O'Connor, states that it was on the 3d of May, soon after he
came home from the East, there was a meeting. On cross-examination
by Mr. Foster, his attention was called to the matter that he was
investigating as a committee-man in regard to auditing the books,
and by that he thinks probably it might have been the 10th--the
following meeting. That does not matter; but Nolan, the other
secretary, the one who keeps the names and numbers of the different
members and their accounts--the financial secretary--states that it
was on the night of the 3d. Here are two undisputed witnesses
uncontradicted by any man in Camp 20; not a man that dare lift up
his hand to God and say that these men have sworn falsely. Here
they come into court and make a statement that is undisputed. Was
the committee appointed?
"On the night of the 3d or the 10th--I do not care which night it
was--some one in the crowd asked the senior guardian if the secret
or private committee had reported. The senior guardian, with his
hand uplifted, said: 'That committee reports to me alone.' That was
John F. Beggs! 'Has that committee reported?' 'That committee
reports to the senior guardian alone.'
THE PLOT TO MURDER CRONIN.
"Had he reference to the trial committee? Why, no. They contended
they had been urging for that committee's report; would he have
made such a remark as that if it had reference to the trial
committee that tried the triangle? No, gentlemen, it had reference
to this secret committee that had been appointed by John F. Beggs;
and to show you that he had appointed it, on the 29th day of April,
over on the South Side of this city, as is testified to by his
friend Spelman, the district officer--on the 29th day of April what
did he say? He said, 'That matter has all been amicably settled.'
How settled? At the hour he spoke the cottage had been rented; at
the hour he spoke the arrangements had been made; at the hour he
spoke the sentence had been fixed; at the hour he spoke it had been
'amicably' settled--that was on the 29th day of April. Is there
anything in the camp that shows it was amicably settled? Has there
been a man to come here to say they visited Dr. Cronin's camp to
investigate why he read this report! Has there been a man that dare
come to the front and say that any investigation had been
made--that anything had been done? No. Then, why was it that this
man, Beggs, said that it had been amicably settled? Because the
committee had agreed that certain things had to be done, and that
they would be done, and therefore there was no occasion for any
further investigation. That is why he told Spelman on the 29th of
April that this matter had been amicably settled. It had been.
"Following that, when he says, 'That committee reports to me
alone,' it is no wonder he made that remark, knowing in his heart
what had been done; knowing the results that were to follow, no
wonder he said 'That committee reports to the senior guardian
alone.'
"Now, if he made that remark--that it was to report to him
alone--where is the man that will assert that there was no
committee appointed? We do not contend that there was a committee
appointed as provided by the constitution in a legitimate way in
their order. There is no such contention here; but that they
assumed to appoint a committee; that they did appoint a committee,
and that that committee was a committee of three. We contend that
that was done for the purpose of covering up the deeds of these men
that followed the appointment of the committee. You remember. There
is nothing said about the appointing the committee to try Dr.
Cronin--nothing is said about the appointing the committee to do
anything except to find out how it was that this was done. If it
had been intended to do anything in an honorable way--in a way that
they must, to be honorable to themselves and the society, and
appointed that committee as Denis O'Connor said, to go up and find
out about the matter and report back--then it might be considered
as of nothing. But they didn't do it. Tell me that it was 'amicably
settled!' What had they done in the camp? What report had been
made? What steps had been taken to investigate the matter? No one
knows except the senior guardian and his committee just what was
said or done."
THE LAW OF CONSPIRACY.
"Now, gentlemen, I shall not bother you by reading much law at this
time. As I stated, I want to go over the evidence, but at this
point I want to call your attention, before entering upon the other
evidence, to the Spies case. I will only read from the syllabus,
and leave the case for others who may wish to refer to it, either
on the side of the people or on the side of the defense. I want to
call your attention to the law of conspiracy as laid down in that
case." [Here Judge Longenecker read a long extract bearing on the
point that where two or more persons combine to do an illegal act,
they are all guilty, whether they are all present at the
consummation of the crime or not.] He then proceeded: "That is all
I desire to read you upon the law of conspiracy. We have talked
about Camp 20 and actions of this order, and we now come up to
another part of the case. You will remember that Throckmorton, of
the real estate agency of Marshall & Knight, on Clark Street, told
you that a man by the name of Simonds appeared there on the 18th of
March and inquired in reference to a flat. He wanted to rent two
rooms on the upper floor of 117 Clark street. The agent told him
they had two rooms on the floor below, and he said he didn't want
them--that he preferred to have those on the upper floor, fronting
on Clark street. You will remember that he stated that they could
not rent two rooms in that flat and he would have to rent the
entire flat, and the man said he would see Mr. Marshall concerning
it. Next day, the 19th, the man appeared again at the office, and
Throckmorton saw Mr. Marshall, who would not rent two rooms and
said he would have to take the entire flat. The fellow said all
right, and paid them $40 for the top flat, which, as you will
remember, was in the neighborhood of Dr. Cronin's office, just
opposite the Chicago Opera House building. You will further
remember that Throckmorton testified that the man pulled the money
out of his pocket in a careless way and paid $40. I don't know
whether he understood why he wanted the front rooms at that time,
but he paid a month's rent and signed a lease. Mr. Marshall
corroborates that statement."
THE PURCHASE OF THE FURNITURE.
"On the same day this man, J. B. Simonds, appeared at Revell's
store. Now, it does not matter whether we have shown that he was a
member of Camp 20 or any thing about it. It does not matter whether
we know who he is, but it is part of the means used in this case,
and for that reason it was admitted in evidence. He said to
Hatfield, the salesman, that he wanted some of the cheapest
furniture he could get. He was taken to the department where the
cheapest furniture is kept. He was quick and firm in his
selections. When he was shown a cheap bedstead he said, 'That is
all right; I will take that.' When he was showed cheap chairs, he
said, 'I will take them.' When Hatfield showed him other pieces of
furniture, he said promptly, 'I will take them.' Then he said he
wanted a cheap trunk, the largest in the store. They went to the
trunk department and they picked out a packing trunk of the largest
size. He said he wanted a common valise and a strap for the trunk.
These articles were all produced and he went away. That must have
been before the signing of the lease for the flat, because he comes
back the next day and tells them to deliver the goods. He picked
out the commonest furniture, stating that it was only for
temporary use. The next day he went back and paid for the furniture
and it was moved to 176 Clark street.
"Now, gentlemen, have you any doubt about that furniture going to
that number? None of you can have a doubt on that question. When he
went back to Revell's he said he wanted a larger sized strap; that
the strap he got was too small, too light, and Mr. Hatfield said he
would get him a larger strap, which he did and charged him 50 cents
for it. Mr. Allen, who moved the furniture, said he took a bed; a
bureau, a washstand, a mattress, a bowl, and pitcher, the trunk
(the valise and strap were inside the trunk) and all the articles
that this man Simonds had purchased, to 117 South Clark street. The
shipping clerk Neahr, who packed the goods testified that the goods
taken over there were the same as those bought by Simonds. This was
followed by the evidence of McHale, the carpet layer, who said he
laid the carpet in the front room of 117 Clark street; that Simonds
appeared there and was very easy about the matter, not caring just
how the carpet was laid, and he had the carpet laid in the front
room. It is not for us to say what the objecting was in renting the
flat at 117 Clark street; it is true that that number was selected;
it is true that this furniture was purchased; it is true that the
trunk was purchased and went with this furniture. Now we find that
the only living person identified as occupying the room, in which
this furniture was placed and the carpet laid, is the man Kunze. He
was seen there with another man taller than himself. They were seen
there frequently during the time the flat was occupied by this man
Simonds, and Kunze was the man who was identified as being in that
flat at the time. That is testified to by James, testified here in
a manner that must convince you that he was telling the truth,
because, in his evidence, he was not over-anxious about anything
else. When the learned counsel for the defense asked him if he had
ever been mistaken about men he had seen on the street, James said
he might have been, that such a thing could happen, but he was not
mistaken as to Kunze being the man who was in the flat. That
evidence was before you, and that is the first time Kunze appears
in this case, with the exception, perhaps, of his trip with
Coughlin down to Peoria, which was in relation to another matter,
and was only shown for the purpose of letting the jury know the
intimacy that existed between Coughlin, the chairman of the
committee and this man who was seen in the flat. He is just the
kind of character, just the kind of man that Daniel Coughlin would
have selected to occupy that room.
"This flat is occupied. We have shown that the furniture was moved
in there, that the trunk was moved in, that the valise and all the
articles purchased at Revell's were moved into that flat, and
stayed there until the night of the 20th. You will remember that
Collector Goldman, who collects the rents for this real estate
firm, went to collect the rent for the flats on the morning of the
20th of March. He didn't find any one in, but he peeped through the
letter hole and saw the carpet and furniture still there and went
away. But when he returned the next morning, the 21st of March, the
flat was vacant. And if you remember the other evidence, you will
find that they moved in the evening. Now, why was that flat
rented? Why was this furniture purchased? Is there any explanation
on earth except that it was purchased and moved in for the very
purpose for which it was used thereafter? Why they selected that
flat at 117 South Clark street is not for us to answer. Why they
should have moved the furniture in there first is problematic,
except it was for the purpose of losing the identity and stopping
the tracing of the property from where it was first purchased. That
might have been the object. It is not necessary we should account
for the reason of their having moved this furniture into that flat,
but it is one piece of evidence in this case that follows along the
line of the conspiracy.
THE MEETINGS IN CAMP 20.
"You will remember that on the 8th there was a meeting. On the 15th
they had another meeting in Camp 20, and after that meeting I have
no doubt--and I have a right to talk in this way; it is only my
opinion; it is an inference drawn from the evidence--after that
meeting, I have no doubt that Dan Coughlin, the chairman of that
committee, sat down and talked to John F. Beggs and considered that
they had better notify the district member; that they had better
fix up something to cover up matters in case anything came out
afterward in reference to the affair. So that on the 16th, the day
after their meeting up here--because they meet every Friday
night--Dan Coughlin and John F. Beggs and other committeemen talked
the matter over, and they decided they had better write to the
district officer, Mr. Spelman, and tell him they wanted to find out
something about Dr. Cronin's camp, for when Beggs writes his
letter, he gives the number of the Columbia Club, and says the
report was read in that camp. Well, they think they had better
write to this district officer, and ask him to tell them something
about what they shall do, and inquire of him about a matter they
knew all about. You remember how the answer of Mr. Spelman came
back, that he knew nothing in the constitution that gave him power
to inflict a penalty. They had already, then, passed upon this man.
This committee had already set their heads together and concluded
it was necessary to inflict a penalty, and that is the reason why
this Peoria man wrote that he knew nothing in the constitution that
required him, or that gave him power to inflict a penalty on the
senior guardian for having read the report of the trial committee
in his camp. This was not written in all seriousness; it was
written as a covering for what had happened in Camp 20.
RENTING THE CARLSON COTTAGE.
"This was on the 16th. On the 17th comes back this letter from
Spelman. On the 18th Beggs writes this other letter, in which he
says the time is coming when the men who are creating disturbances
in the Irish organization will find there is a day of punishment.
He had it on his mind he had been conferring with this committee.
On the 18th Mr. Simonds was talking of renting the flat, and when
Beggs wrote this letter in reply to Spelman, stating that the time
is coming when those men who are creating this disturbance would
learn there is a day of punishment, then it was they began active
operations. On the 19th the furniture was purchased and placed in
the flat, so there is no other theory on earth than that it was the
work of this committee, whoever they may be. Well, it does not stop
there. On the 20th of March we find that a man by the name of Frank
Williams appears on the scene. He introduces himself on the
afternoon of the 20th, and I was somewhat surprised that my brother
Donahoe spent a whole half-day trying to show that P. O'Sullivan
was an hour's ride from home at noon that day. This all occurred on
the afternoon of the 20th, and the object of that proof was to show
that this man, Martin Burke, alias Williams, alias Cooper and
Delaney, didn't walk over the plot and talk to P. O'Sullivan after
he rented the cottage. It was to show that P. O'Sullivan was not at
home about that time on the 20th, and I was somewhat surprised that
the learned counsel wasted time on it. Charles Carlson said it was
in the afternoon when this man Williams came to rent the cottage.
He knew positively that it was after one o'clock, but the exact
time he could not state. That is not disputed by any one. So it is
no use quibbling over that alibi; there is nothing of an alibi
about it. It is all as plain as it can be that the renting took
place on the afternoon of the 20th. But, anyway, this man, Frank
Williams, who is loaded down with names, comes and rents the
cottage. The testimony of Jonas Carlson shows that he had a sign
'For Rent' on his cottage; and you must remember that it is just
102 feet from the steps of O'Sullivan's house to the entrance of
Mr. Carlson's back gate, and it is only 166 feet to the corner of
the front cottage, in which this murder was committed.
"There was the sign 'For Rent' on that Carlson cottage; there was
Patrick O'Sullivan, a member of Camp 20, a man who had been saying
that Dr. Cronin was taking deputies into the camp, to say that the
cottage was to rent. He knew that the old folks went to bed at an
early hour; he knew the habits of these poor old people. Patrick
O'Sullivan knew there were but two houses on the entire block on
that side of the street; he knew there were not half a dozen houses
within a radius of three or four blocks. Now, Martin Burke, who
belonged to the same camp, and was present at the time the
committee was ordered to be appointed--Martin Burke, under the name
of Frank Williams, appears on the scene and wants to rent the
cottage. He told Jonas Carlson that his sister intended to keep
house for him and his brother. Now, remember that every time
anything was said about the flat or the cottage the party was to
come from the East. Simonds said his brother was coming from the
East to have his eyes treated, and he wanted to be near the center
of the city for that purpose. This man, Frank Williams, who turned
out to be none other than Martin Burke, a brother in Camp 20,
appears and says his sister is coming from the East. Martin was not
so lavish with his money as Simonds was, because when the old man
wanted $12 a month he wanted him to take $11. Martin wanted to save
all he could out of the pile; but this man Simonds, who had the
bulk of the money, pulls it out in rolls when he was going to pay
for anything. Simonds carried his money just as the trianglers
would carry it, who had been robbing the Irish cause for years, but
Martin Burke, who had been working in the ditches, thought if he
could save a dollar out of the $12 he would do it. But Mr. Carlson
refused to lower the rent and he paid the $12. Then he said his
sister was coming from the East to keep house for them. You can
have no doubt that the cottage was rented by a man named Frank
Williams. Mr. Carlson and his wife, and Charles Carlson and his
wife, who were present, said that he rented the cottage. Charles
wrote out the receipt and signed it for his father and gave it to
Frank Williams. Here are three persons who swore that Frank
Williams rented the cottage. And here is a significant incident for
you to remember. They started out with assumed names. Martin Burke
appears as Frank Williams. If he were renting the cottage for a
lawful purpose, if he wished it for no other purpose than to occupy
it in a legitimate way, to have his sister come and keep house for
him, there would be no occasion for his renting it under the name
of Frank Williams. That is conceded. So, then, he must have rented
this cottage for some other purpose. It was not because he wanted
to keep from paying the rent, because he paid it in advance. That
was not the cause; he did not want to lose his identity in order to
keep from paying the rent. It was for an unlawful purpose that he
went there to rent the cottage. The learned counsel on the other
side can not dispute that proposition. The old gentleman said
Williams went out after receiving the receipt and talked to
O'Sullivan. Now, O'Sullivan did not live a half a mile or
three-quarters of a mile away. You must not think that O'Sullivan
lived at one end of the town and Carlson at the other end. His
place is just across the lot from the Carlsons. The old gentleman
testified that Burke went out of the front gate and walked to where
O'Sullivan was standing at his barn and said, 'The cottage is
rented.' The old gentleman said he didn't understand what else was
said. You remember how hard it was for him to express himself in
the English language, and yet counsel undertook to impeach that old
man by proving what he said at the coroner's inquest. There is no
dispute that he said then he could not hear what Burke said there.
There is no use denying that. He said practically the same thing
here. He said he heard Martin Burke say to O'Sullivan that the
cottage was rented, but he could not hear what else was said. Now,
that is about the same thing. You must have noticed how hard it was
to understand Carlson when he testified in the English language.
Mrs. Carlson said she didn't know where Burke went, but that the
young man talked to her husband, who asked him some questions as to
where he was working. The old gentleman is the only one who saw him
go outside and heard him say this to Patrick O'Sullivan.
"It was quite natural, was it not? Here was Martin Burke, a brother
in the camp, Martin Burke who had met O'Sullivan before, going
cross-lot to speak to O'Sullivan. How did Martin Burke know this
cottage was for rent? How did he know there was a vacant cottage
out there near Patrick O'Sullivan? Who was it brought it to his
ears, unless it was Daniel Coughlin or Patrick O'Sullivan? And you
will remember that one of the witnesses testified that all through
the month of March telephoning was going on between O'Sullivan and
Coughlin. Coughlin knew all about Lake View because----"
Messrs. Forrest and Donahue here interrupted with vigorous
objections, claiming that this evidence was ruled out. The Court
decided in their favor, and remarked that the telephoning was in
April.
Judge Longenecker corrected himself accordingly, and continued:
"But Dan Coughlin was up in Lake View in March; Dan Coughlin knew
the whole ground there. Patrick O'Sullivan lived within a stone's
throw of the cottage. The card was on for rent. A motion was made
in the camp of which Coughlin, O'Sullivan and Burke were members; a
flat had been rented, furniture purchased and placed in it. How did
this man Williams know that this cottage was for rent? How did he
know where to go to rent that cottage unless some one of those
parties had talked to him, either Dan Coughlin or Patrick
O'Sullivan? Those three witnesses swear that Frank Williams rented
it, and do you think that Williams was anybody else except this man
Burke? When the old gentleman was called to identify him he walked
down in front of him and said: 'That is the man.' Mrs. Carlson
said: 'That is the man.' Charles Carlson says, 'That is the man.'
Mrs. Joanna Carlson said: 'That is the man.' There are four
witnesses that swore that Martin Burke rented the cottage. I don't
suppose the defendant's attorneys will dispute that proposition.
"I want to know why Martin Burke rented that cottage. What
explanation is there to give for its being rented? If Martin Burke
rented it intending that his sister should keep house for himself
and his brother, why didn't they keep house? If Martin Burke was
working at the stock yards and even went to Joliet to work; if he
worked for the city in the sewers, why did he go out to Lake View
to get a house? Well, if we can not find a reason for this by
following the evidence, we will give you a pretty good reason for
his not occupying it. My judgment is that he ought to be compelled
to live there for all the days of his life. He ought to be required
to wallow in the blood that there was drawn from the veins of Dr.
Cronin!
"Why didn't he occupy this cottage? We find by this man Mortensen,
a Swede who was driving an express wagon and stood on the corner of
Chicago avenue and Market street, in the neighborhood of Dan
Coughlin's station--this man Mortensen says he was standing there
about 5 o'clock in the evening when a man, whom he identifies as
Martin Burke, came up and wanted him to move some furniture. Burke
had again to 'jew' the man in reference to dollars and cents. He
said: 'You can do it for $1.50.' Mortensen wanted $2, but finally
he agreed to do it for $1.50. He told the expressman to report at
117 Clark street and he would be on hand. Mortensen drove up to the
number given him and found Burke standing at the door. There are
the two men we first see at 117 South Clark street--Kunze, the
little German, and Burke, the Irishman. Kunze had been sleeping
there."
KUNZE MAKES AN OBJECTION.
"I never did," shouted Kunze, rising to his feet and shaking his
fist at the State's Attorney.
"Burke was moving the furniture with another man," continued Judge
Longenecker.
"That is a lie," broke in Kunze again. The little German seemed
very much excited, and it required all the power of Mr. Donahoe to
soothe him.
"There is no attempt to prove," proceeded the State's Attorney,
"that Kunze helped to move the furniture; nobody would believe that
he would lift anything; but this man Burke was there to move his
sister's furniture, and another man with a moustache was there to
help him. They would not let the expressman go up-stairs to help
them. What did they carry down from that flat? Did any one else
move from there that day? No, because if they had it would have
been in evidence here. No desks were moved out. No lawyers were
shifting because they could not pay their rent; no doctors were
moving out because they could not collect their bills; but Martin
Burke was moving his furniture to put into the cottage in which his
sister was to keep house for himself and brother. They carried down
a bedstead, a mattress, a washstand, a trunk. Mortensen didn't see
the valise and the strap, because you will remember that Allen said
the valise and strap were inside the trunk. Mortensen didn't see
the lamp, but he saw all the other articles which this man,
Simonds, bought--this man who thought so much of Burke and his
sister as to buy household furniture for them. The furniture was
put on the wagon, and they told Mortensen to drive to a point in
Lake View, and they would go by the cable. Mortensen went and
waited for them at the place designated. They were late in
arriving, and said the cable had broken down as usual. They drove
up in a buggy, and told him to follow them. They drove to the
Carlson cottage, and the furniture was carried in there--a trunk, a
bureau, a washstand, washbowl and pitcher--all the articles that
were bought at Revell's. The other man is not here on trial; it
does not matter who he may be. It is not for you to stop to inquire
about those we have not got. To take care of the one we have is all
that we are after now.
"You can have no doubt that Martin Burke moved this furniture.
Mortensen saw him two or three times afterward; saw him on Chicago
avenue, always walking on the south side of the street leading to
the station, where Coughlin drew his pay for organizing a
conspiracy against citizens of Chicago. It runs on now to the 24th
of March, and what do we find? March 20 the cottage was rented;
March 20 this man Burke moved the furniture in, which was
identified by Mr. Hatfield. Something had to be done to get Dr.
Cronin out there. 'We have got the cottage,' said the chairman of
the committee. 'Yes, I have rented it,' says Burke. 'Yes, it is
near me,' says O'Sullivan. I am reasoning now from evidence. I have
a right to talk that way. Well, on the 24th of March Dan Coughlin
was in Mahoney's saloon on Chicago avenue, and was seen by Quinn
and Riley talking to P. O'Sullivan near the screen. They were
engaged in a whispered conversation and afterward came up into the
crowd. Recollect that before that Patrick O'Sullivan had been
charging that Dr. Cronin had been taking deputies into the
organization. Recollect that he had charged in open camp that
Cronin had been taking in deputies, and a discussion arose there
between Patrick O'Sullivan and Dan Coughlin about deputies. Then it
was that this man Coughlin said 'if a North Side Catholic doesn't
keep his mouth shut he will soon be put out of the way,' or
something to that effect. That was testified to by Quinn and Riley,
and is undisputed. This man Coughlin, whose mind was full of
murder, being chairman of this committee about Cronin, and about
the object of which he was talking to O'Sullivan, they having been
discussing the question of how to get Cronin to the cottage, it was
in his mind, and he broke out without thinking what he was saying,
without thinking that the words would come back at him in future
months. He says: 'A North Side Catholic, if he doesn't keep his
mouth shut, will be done away with.' Who was he referring to? Dr.
Cronin had charged that the triangle had almost ruined their
organization. Dr. Cronin had charged that the man who was the
friend of Coughlin was a thief and a robber. Dr. Cronin had charged
that this man had thrust innocent men into prison in order to cover
up his stealing. Why was Dan Coughlin thinking then of this
subject? Because he and this man were discussing how they could
induce Dr. Cronin to go to the Carlson cottage; because they were
then planning as to how they could get him there after Martin Burke
had rented the place; this I believe to be the true state of his
mind at that time. I believe they talked it over in that way just
as much as if I had heard it from their very lips."
ENTICING CRONIN TO HIS DEATH.
"This is not all, gentlemen. Something had to be done to get Dr.
Cronin out to Lake View. Dan Coughlin, the schemer and originator,
had put O'Sullivan into a notion of doing something that he had
never thought of before. Nothing had then occurred to show that
O'Sullivan would have trouble with his icemen--nothing to lead him
to believe that there might be accidents and damage suits, and that
he would be in need of a physician. But the idea struck him. Dan
Coughlin had talked with him on the 24th. On the 29th there was a
literary society organized in Lake View, and Dr. Cronin was brought
up to organize it. They wanted to get him familiar with the
country. They wanted to get him used to driving in that locality.
What did he do? This man, O'Sullivan, who was as cold as the ice on
his wagons, goes to the meeting with a friend and helps to organize
this Clan-na-Gael camp in Lake View. They took in Justice Mahoney,
who was a candidate for office. Whenever a man gets running for
office he joins nearly everything, and Mahoney thought it was
necessary for him to join this literary society. Dr. Cronin made a
speech, and it was such a good one that Mahoney said the thing
ought to be open to all the world. My idea is that if Irishmen
should be free, it should be done open and above board. If there is
any reason for establishing a republican form of government in
Ireland, let your speech be open and not in secret.
"When Mahoney went in there he belonged to the United Workmen. That
is a good order. I used to belong to it myself, but I got dropped
for non-payment of dues. Mahoney used to know Dr. Cronin as the
examining physician of his lodge. He used to send men to him to be
examined, and that made Dr. Cronin and himself good friends. Now,
when Mahoney made a speech, Dr. Cronin lauded him to the skies,
stating what a good thing it was to have that man in the
society--that it was quite an advantage to the order to have him.
Patrick O'Sullivan, with his cold, icy heart, took it all in. The
idea struck him at once, 'Here are Mahoney and Dr. Cronin, great
friends,' and afterward he said to Mahoney: 'Do you know Cronin
well?' Mahoney said 'Yes.' 'Is he a good doctor?' asked O'Sullivan.
'Yes.' 'Will you go down and introduce me to him?' continued the
iceman: 'I want to make a contract with him to treat my men.' And
Mahoney said he'd do so.
"Why did that wretch want to employ Dr. Cronin? Why was it he
wanted all at once to have Dr. Cronin attend to his men, when by
his own admission he had never had occasion within the last five
years for a doctor to treat one of his men. By his own admission he
never had an accident during all his ice seasons, except when a
piece of ice once fell on a little girl, but he never had a charge
or a damage suit against him in regard to it. This was on the 29th
of March. Do you think I am stretching it too far when I conclude
that he and Coughlin had talked the matter over and considered what
inducements they could make to get the Doctor out there? Could you,
as sensible men, come to any other conclusion than that this man,
on the pay roll of the city, was then telling O'Sullivan, 'You must
get some scheme by which Cronin will be brought to the cottage or
you will never kill him there?' Why didn't O'Sullivan step up to
the Doctor that night and make his contract? Simply because he
wanted to get the Doctor off his guard. He knew that Dr. Cronin
would at once begin to figure the matter out. He would say, Dan
Coughlin and P. O'Sullivan are great friends, but if Mahoney is
there he would be all right and he would never suspect a thing."
JUSTICE MAHONEY'S PART IN THE PLOT.
"Mahoney said they didn't go down the next day. Then the election
came on, and Dan Coughlin, having been in the habit of running the
election, I suppose, so far as the Clan-na-Gael part is concerned,
was busy. Patrick O'Sullivan, being something of a politician
himself in his neighborhood, had also to attend the election. The
rent was paid for a month any way, so they ran along until the 19th
of April. If you figure that out, you will find it was soon after
another meeting of the Clan-na-Gael Camp--soon after the committee
had a chance to get together. You will find that on the 18th
O'Sullivan left word with Mahoney that he would like him to go down
with him to see Dr. Cronin. Mahoney, acting in good faith, met him,
and they went down to Dr. Cronin's office. Now, we have the object.
We have one of the members of Camp 20 renting the cottage; we have
another member of Camp 20 going to make a contract with the
Doctor. He goes to the office and tells the Doctor he would like to
employ him to attend to his men during the ice season. You remember
what the contract was. They talked about it and figured on the
price, which was finally agreed as $50 for the ice season, or seven
months. The Doctor asked O'Sullivan if he had had any accidents and
O'Sullivan said no, but he didn't know what might occur--that the
horses might run off and hurt somebody. Mahoney testified to this.
Here is a significant fact. It was on the 19th of April that this
contract was made. Now remember that on that day Patrick O'Sullivan
handed the Doctor some cards, saying, 'I may be out of town and my
card will be presented to you.' This is significant when we get to
another branch of this evidence. Now, he reports again to the
chairman of the committee that 'the contract is made; Cronin is
thrown off his guard; Mahoney went with me.' Now, to show you that
he was watching what he was doing, Frank Murray tells us that on
the morning of the 5th of May O'Sullivan told him that he happened
to be down town and met Mahoney, and that he wanted Mahoney to go
with him to make this contract. It was an accidental meeting, he
said. The committee had had a chance to meet and consult again in
the meantime. The furniture was bought; it was moved into the
cottage; the contract with the Doctor was made; they had it all
arranged, and when Spelman comes to the city on the 29th of April
the senior guardian says, 'It is all amicably settled.'"
ALL ARRANGEMENTS COMPLETED.
"But something else must be done. On the 20th of April, the day
after the contract was made, Frank Williams appears again on the
scene. Mrs. Johanna Carlson testified that he came there and paid
the rent, and then she and her son requested permission to enter
the cottage and get a lounge and an old trunk left there by the
former occupant of the premises. Charles Carlson went into the
cottage with Martin Burke. He saw the carpet on the floor and the
bed with its pillows. He didn't notice everything particularly, of
course, but Williams showed him around and helped him out with the
lounge and trunk. He paid the rent again and Mrs. Carlson wanted to
know why they didn't move in. He said his sister was sick in the
hospital and that as soon as she got well they would move in. That
paid the rent up to the 20th of May. Soon after that--the same day
or the day after--Mrs. Carlson, who was worrying, as an old lady
would, about the property, which was their only dependence, talked
to her husband about the matter. The old gentleman went over to see
O'Sullivan. Now why should he go over to see O'Sullivan? The
defense put a witness on the stand to prove that the old man went
over to see O'Sullivan. Why should old man Carlson, who scarcely
knew O'Sullivan, walk over to him to inquire about his tenant?
Because he had seen Martin Burke walk over there and heard him say
the cottage was rented. Jonas Carlson went there and said: 'How
about those tenants? Why don't they move in? Do you know them?'
O'Sullivan said, 'I know one of them. Is your rent due?' 'No,' said
the old man. 'Well,' replied O'Sullivan, 'you will get your
rent--that is all right.' Does not that of itself convince you,
gentlemen, that what the old gentleman swore to as to Martin Burke
going to O'Sullivan was his reason for going to speak to O'Sullivan
on this occasion? Is not that convincing of itself that the old man
told the truth when he said he saw Martin Burke walk out there and
tell O'Sullivan the cottage was rented? But I don't care whether
you believe the statement that the old man heard the words or not.
The fact is nevertheless true that Martin Burke did go over to this
man O'Sullivan, because if he had not, the old man would never have
thought about going to O'Sullivan to ask about moving in.
"After making this contract, O'Sullivan goes home and sits down to
the dinner table, and the first thing he says is: 'If there is any
sickness in the family I have a doctor hired,' and he tells Mrs.
Whalen and all the icemen that 'I have a doctor hired. Any time you
want a doctor send for him.' His contract with the Doctor was not
that he should treat sick people, or treat Mrs. Whalen, Tom Whalen
and their children, and everybody in the neighborhood. The contract
was not for that purpose. It was for treating injuries to his
icemen. Yet he goes home and wants them to understand it right away
in the house. But that is not all. He had given the Doctor a card.
Something must be done. This man, Coughlin, who was on the
detective force for years, and who was signing the pay-roll every
month--this man gave him to understand that something else must be
done. Then O'Sullivan goes to work and has a new card printed in
April. He gets them just before the 4th of May. It is a different
card from the one he gave Dr. Cronin. He had no idea that the new
card would ever land on the mantelpiece of the house where Dr.
Cronin resided; he had no idea that card would ever again face him.
He did not expect this, because they try to prove that he got a
bunch of new cards for distribution. His idea was this: That if
they claimed that the card was presented for the Doctor to go to
his house he could say the town was full of those cards. Don't you
see? He was getting a new card printed which was to be used in
drawing the Doctor out there. But it was never intended to be left
in the possession of Dr. Cronin. If it was they supposed the Doctor
would stick it in his pocket. O'Sullivan had no idea that any
living soul would see that card thereafter. It was for a purpose,
anyway.
"Now we have all this arranged; we have the whole thing 'amicably
settled;' that was the way in which it was to be done. We have the
cottage rented, the contract with the Doctor; now it is all
'amicably settled'--just how we are going to complete the work; we
don't need district officers or outside help; it is all arranged;
the work will be completed."
BEGGS' ENMITY TOWARD CRONIN.
"Now we will tell you about other things in this case before we
come to the 4th of May. You will remember that in September John F.
Beggs was walking down the street with Mr. O'Keefe, and Mr. Flynn,
and they were discussing Dr. Cronin. Beggs said Dr. Cronin was not
fit to belong to the Irish cause. When you brand an Irishman as not
being fit to belong to the Irish cause it means that he is a man to
be held in contempt by the Irish people. Beggs gave as a reason
that he had taken Dan Coughlin in without ever initiating him, and
O'Keefe, said he was going to investigate it. I have no doubt that
somebody filled up Beggs in reference to Dr. Cronin. I have no
doubt somebody stood behind him telling him what a terrible man he
was; that he was always creating disturbances in the order; that
somebody talked him up in this matter until he got to be senior
guardian.
"Up to the 4th of May Dr. Cronin still lived, but all the
arrangements were 'amicably settled.' 'The matter I was writing to
you has been amicably settled,' wrote Beggs. I want to call your
attention to another thing: You remember that about a year ago last
September, about the time that Beggs was talking about Cronin not
being a good Irishman, about that time Dan Coughlin was trying to
get some one to 'slug' Dr. Cronin. Now you must believe that
statement. Here were three witnesses. They did not all swear to the
same point, but all directed to the same thing that Sampson swore
to. You remember that Garrity testified that this man Coughlin told
him he would like to see Sampson, as he had some work he wanted
Sampson to do--that he wanted him to 'slug' Dr. Cronin. Now, if
Garrity is the kind of man that Dan Coughlin's learned attorney
would have you believe, and I don't say he is not, Garrity then is
the kind of man that Coughlin would talk to about this, is he not?
If this man Sampson is in the habit of loafing in Garrity's saloon,
Garrity would be the man that Coughlin would go to in order to get
a word to Sampson; and in order to get Sampson from running from
him, Coughlin told Garrity he wanted to see him. Garrity said he
told Sampson. Sampson took this man Lynn with him. The
conversation, of course, is not in evidence; it was not competent,
but Lynn stands across the street. Sampson didn't know but what
maybe this man Coughlin wanted to run him in; he didn't know but
what it was a job put up on him. You don't suppose that Coughlin
would have sent for a class leader in a Methodist church to do this
job, nor would he send for a banker or a lawyer or a doctor to it.
But he picked up Sampson. He thought Sampson was void of all
respect, and he said: 'Sampson, I want you to slug a man.' It was
just before election, and he said: 'You can catch him some night
when he is coming to his house, because he is out attending
political meetings. I want you to mark him.' He is pretty good at
leaving his mark," exclaimed the State's Attorney, "and he wanted
Sampson to mark Dr. Cronin. What does that show? It shows an ill
feeling, it shows a hatred in this man's heart. That something was
moving in Dan Coughlin's heart that caused him to make this
proposition to Sampson. The attorneys for the defense will insist
that this is absurd, that it is ridiculous and not reasonable.
Gentlemen, there it is, there is the evidence undisputed."
MAJOR SAMPSON'S PART IN THE SCHEME.
"Now, I don't care what you may think of Sampson. Sampson told you
that he played with the shells. He told you he had been in the
bridewell, but never in the penitentiary; he told you he had
followed gatherings and made money in a crooked way--he as much as
said all that. But who was it that was familiar with all this? and
where did the learned counsel who cross-examined him for the
defense learn the man's record, except from Dan Coughlin? How did
they know the history of this man Sampson unless they got it from
Coughlin? How did they know what he had done in Michigan? They
didn't happen to ask him if he was ever in Hancock, Mich. But they
knew all of his doings in Michigan and southern Illinois, when he
was following James G. Blaine. If Sampson was a crook, a thief and
a robber--if he were the man they would have you believe--Dan
Coughlin, in the pay of the city, and not doing his duty in this
respect, was not fit to be on the police force. He must have known
of this. The attorney could not have dreamed or guessed it, because
Sampson says it is so. With all their cross-examination they didn't
even impeach him on these questions. Then how about Garrity.
Garrity says he was arrested for selling liquor without a license,
but the case was dismissed, and Dan Coughlin had charge of it."
"The evidence is that Captain Schaack had charge of the case,"
interrupted Forrest. "Coughlin swore out the warrant."
"But the lawyer insisted," responded Judge Longenecker, "that Dan
Coughlin was the man who got Garrity's license revoked. If this man
was violating the law, and Dan Coughlin swore out the warrant, it
was his duty to prosecute; but they bring Loewenstein on the stand
and he tells you that Garrity's saloon was a place for thieves and
robbers. If that is so, then what is the duty of those police
officers; what was their duty as men put on the force to look after
the interests of this city? It was their duty to forever shut up
the doors of this saloon--forever blot it out of existence, this
robbers' roost, and not to come here and try to break down the
evidence we gathered from the very men who were the associates of
Dan Coughlin.
"Now there is more in that, gentlemen, than you can think of. When
you couple it with Dan Coughlin's expression to Dinan, 'Don't say
anything because I have had trouble with Dr. Cronin--because they
know I am his enemy,' it is very significant. Why did they know it?
He had told Garrity he wanted to see Sampson; he told Sampson he
wanted him to slug Dr. Cronin, and he had whispered into the ears
of O'Connor that Cronin was a spy. He had charged in a North Side
saloon that a prominent North Side Catholic would soon be
destroyed. On every corner he had raised his hand against Dr.
Cronin. In the lodge he moved to appoint this secret committee to
investigate Dr. Cronin, and when you couple it all together it is a
good piece of evidence in this case, as tending to show the
direction in which Daniel Coughlin was moving at the time he
uttered the words."
TRUE TO THE IRISH CAUSE.
"Now, gentlemen, I want to say, before I pass on to the 4th of May,
and I think it is due from me, as a public prosecutor, to say this:
You have seen from day to day that we have called on the stand
unwilling witnesses from Camp 20, and I want to say this, that the
best patriots in the Irish cause to-day are the men we got on the
stand to tell you the truth in reference to this case--Thomas
O'Connor, and Henry Owen O'Connor, Patrick Dolan and Patrick
McGarry. They are the best patriots that have appeared on the face
of the globe. Here are men that stood up in this court-room and
dared to tell the truth of what had happened in Camp 20, and I feel
that it is due upon this occasion to say that the Irish cause never
had better patriots than these men who came afterward and testified
to the truth and to tell you where this hellish conspiracy
originated. They have the nerve to come and tell us where it began,
in order that the law might be vindicated; in order that the death
of Patrick Henry Cronin might be avenged. I say this because it is
due to them. Their evidence is undisputed. It has not been
contradicted; they came out with clean hands.
"As to Sampson, I do not care what the attorney may say in regard
to him. As to Garrity, I think both of them deserve credit for
coming forward and telling the truth in this case. It is not often
that you can get men, who are hounded to death by officers, who
would lead the community to believe that they are the worst
creatures on earth--it is not often that you can get them on the
stand. They stood there for an hour with the counsel, prompted by
the man who knows all about them, to question and put question
after question as to their character."
The State's Attorney, at this point, asked the Court for an
adjournment, and intimated that he would not take more than an hour
further to conclude his address. Some suggestion as to an
adjournment until half-past one was modestly made, but on the
State's Attorney's assurance the Court adjourned proceedings until
two o'clock.
THE FATAL 4TH OF MAY.
On the assembling of court at 2 o'clock, State's Attorney
Longenecker resumed his address to the jury:
"If the Court please, and Gentlemen, as I stated in my opening of
yesterday, I do not desire to do anything but talk about the
evidence. On the 4th of May Dan Coughlin, one of the defendants
here, appeared at Patrick Dinan's livery stable. It was customary
for the Chicago Avenue Station to hire horses whenever they desired
them at Mr. Dinan's stable, which is just north of the Chicago
Avenue Station on Clark street, so that it was not an unusual thing
for Dan Coughlin to go there or for any officer to call for a horse
and buggy, and it was not customary for Mr. Dinan to inquire what
they desired with the horse and buggy. You remember Patrick Dinan's
testimony in regard to this. Coughlin said he had a friend who
wanted a horse and buggy and would call for it about 7 o'clock
that evening, showing that Dan Coughlin was an actor in reference
to this horse and buggy that was obtained from Dinan. He told
Patrick Dinan that his friend would call at 7 o'clock, and at 7
o'clock a man came. Napier Moreland, who was a buggy washer and
worked in the stable, testifies that at just about 7 o'clock a man
appeared there and called for the horse and buggy that Detective
Coughlin had engaged. Dinan was out in the barn. Just then Dinan
came back and the stranger got under the gaslight that was in the
buggy part of the stable and asked for the horse that Dan Coughlin
had engaged for him. Dinan ordered the horse called the gray horse
and sometimes the white, to be hitched to the buggy. There was a
blacksmith named Jones, there getting a horse, and the stranger did
not want the white horse, but wanted the other rig. Mr. Dinan told
him he could not have that; he did not know where it was going and
he knew what this horse was going to do, and Moreland got the old
gray horse. You remember that Dinan said that it had not been out
of the stable for quite a while and had not been driven. This was a
little after 7 o'clock. He wanted side curtains and Dinan told him
it was a warm evening and he did not need side curtains and it
would take too long to put on side curtains. The man, grumbling,
got into the buggy and they put on the hitching strap to it, and
Dinan tells you that this man had a low-crowned, narrow-rimmed
slouch hat. That he did not see his eyes, because he pulled his hat
over his forehead, but his face looked as if it had not been
shaven, and he had a black or a brown mustache. He gives his height
as 5 feet and 7 inches, and said that he had a dirty, faded looking
overcoat. Moreland testifies to the same thing; that the man had on
a low-crowned, narrow-rimmed slouch hat, and that his face looked
dirty, and he describes him about the same that Dinan does.
"How did the horse start when he turned out? It went directly
north. Dinan swore that he was anxious to see the horse drive off,
and he watched the man drive north on Clark street. Then he was
going north. Mrs. Conklin tells you that a man came there a little
after seven o'clock and came to the door and rang the bell, and
that Sarah McNearney and Agnes McNearney were there at the office.
You remember the description of the house; there were two flats,
and Dr. Cronin occupied one front room and Mr. and Mrs. Conklin
used the other front room for living purposes. She states that when
this man came to the door she admitted him into the room. He says
he is in a hurry and wants the Doctor, and the Doctor says, 'very
well; I will be there in a minute.' You remember now that the
McNearney girl, who was sitting outside, says that he had on a
slouch hat with a narrow brim and his face had not been shaven for
some time. He had a very keen eye--his eye was so piercing that she
could not look at him, and he had a restless manner. He said there
was an accident to one of P. O'Sullivan's men; that he had been run
over by an ice wagon, and the Doctor said: 'Why didn't you get a
doctor near?' 'Doctor,' he said, 'here is O'Sullivan's card,' and
Dr. Cronin took it and laid it on the mantel in his own room, and
then wrote out a prescription for Sarah McNearney. Mrs. Conklin
described the man, the same as the McNearney girls, saying that he
had a low-crowned, narrow-brimmed hat, and that his face was dirty
as if it had not been shaven."
THE MAN WHO DROVE THE WHITE HORSE.
"They all agree upon this low-crowned hat with the narrow brim and
the condition of the man's face. The Doctor gathered up the cotton
and splints and a little satchel in which he had his instruments.
The man said: 'I have a horse and buggy here for you.' That
attracted her attention to the window, and she looked out and stood
by the south bay window, and looked down at the horse that was
standing in front of the saloon, and she saw that the horse had an
uneasy appearance, and, in describing the facts, she said that his
knees were in motion. You remember she describes how he was
standing there. Now, Dinan gave just the same description as to his
appearance--that he looked as if he wanted to go but he was not
much of a goer. Frank Scanlon was standing there, and he wanted to
see the Doctor about an arrangement regarding a paper that the
Doctor was publishing at that time, and gives the same description.
Now, here are five or six witnesses that describe this man, three
or four at the Doctor's office, and two at the livery stable.
"Now suppose the horse was not identified at all; suppose it was a
bay horse or a brown horse or any other kind of a horse than a
white horse or a gray horse, and suppose these two men had come
that gave the same description of the man that appeared at Dinan's
livery stable, and other witnesses identified him as the man that
started away with the Doctor to treat one of O'Sullivan's men--keep
that circumstance in mind--that Patrick O'Sullivan and Dan Coughlin
were seen together on the night of the 24th of March, when Patrick
O'Sullivan was to make this contract, that they both belonged to
the same order, and that the contract was made and O'Sullivan says:
'My card will be presented to you if I am out of town.' Take that
circumstance and what have you got? You have men who identified the
horse that Dan Coughlin hired; you have that man driving north on
Clark street in the direction of the Carlson cottage; you have that
man presenting Patrick O'Sullivan's card and demanding the
attention of the Doctor under the contract that Patrick O'Sullivan
had with the Doctor, and you have them driving in the direction of
the Carlson cottage. But that is not all the evidence we have on
that point. Suppose that this is an ordinary horse that can not be
identified, yet Mrs. Conklin tells you that that horse is a horse,
that she remembers it not simply because it was a white horse and
because it came from Dinan's livery stable, but she describes it
from its uneasy motion; she remembers its legs and its knees. She
says it has big knees, and Captain Schaack says it has big knees.
And Mrs. Conklin, looking out of the window on that fatal night saw
those knees. Why does she say that? The last time she saw Dr.
Cronin alive he was sitting behind that horse that had knees that
were wabbly. No wonder she remembers that horse, because she saw it
in the same uneasy appearance that it had the night that Dr. Cronin
was driven away. She identifies the horse from the knees and from
the uneasy appearance, quite as much as if it was white or gray."
The State's Attorney then reviewed Captain Schaack's testimony as
to how he had driven the horse around in front of Mrs. Conklin's
house and as to the question of identification, and repeated his
arguments that it was not the position in which the horse stood,
but its peculiar, uneasy motion that enabled her to identify it. He
considered that the identification of the horse by Mrs. Conklin was
a fact that could not be disputed. The undertaker who arranged for
Cronin's funeral and Mr. Scanlon had also observed the same horse,
and he considered the identification complete.
THE IDENTIFICATION OF THE HORSE.
"They bring a man from New Jersey who stood here across the street,
and the only reason why he says it is the same horse is because the
horse that drove Cronin away was a gray horse, and this horse of
Dinan's is a white horse. Did this man who traveled all the way
from New Jersey tell you what kind of knees the horse had? Did he
tell you there was anything wrong with the horse that drove Dr.
Cronin away? No; but he says, looking from under an electric light
on the opposite side of the street, he could see that that was a
gray horse with dark legs, and therefore it was not the horse that
drove Dr. Cronin away. On the question of identifying the horse,
here are two witnesses where they could have a good view of the
horse, swear positively that that was the horse. It is true that
they brought the other man who looked across the street with
nothing to attract his attention to the horse as much as the man,
but Mrs. Conklin could not help looking to the parties getting into
the buggy.
"But lay that aside; lay aside the evidence of the identification
of the horse; when you gather up this chain from the 8th day of
February--with the renting of the flat; with the writing of the
letters; with the renting of the cottage; with the removal of the
furniture; with the fact that Coughlin hired the horse and that his
man was there at 7 o'clock on his own time--within five minutes of
the time--that he appears there with P. O'Sullivan's card in his
hand--what more evidence do you want to satisfy you that the horse
that drove Dr. Cronin to his death was any other than the one that
Daniel Coughlin hired of Dinan?
"On the 4th of May we find that about eight o'clock, or a little
after, at the Carlson cottage, a gray horse is seen coming up
Ashland avenue--the gray horse that was hired by Daniel Coughlin,
and that started from Dinan's livery stable northward at twenty
minutes after seven o'clock. Immediately after eight o'clock the
gray horse was seen coming from the north on Ashland avenue, driven
by a man whom the party could not describe. Remember that Dr.
Cronin started with a satchel and with his box of splints, and with
a roll of cotton; that he carried them on his lap, and that he wore
a slouch hat with a low crown, and a brown overcoat; and that this
horse and buggy that the man had seen coming north he observed that
the horse was gray. He saw the buggy turned round and a tall man
get out and reach in and take something out, as if it were a dark
satchel, and go up the steps into the cottage, and the man in a
brown coat with a high-crowned hat went into the cottage. The buggy
then drove south. It was a white horse that drew it away. Here we
have the white horse from Dinan's stable, seeming to start for the
Carlson cottage, and here we have the white horse taking Dr. Cronin
away in the buggy, and a man getting out of the buggy and going up
the steps into the cottage. It looks as if Providence, working in a
mysterious way, designed that there should be some one to see the
last steps taken by this poor man as he rushed up the steps full of
life and full of hope, going in there to relieve suffering
humanity. This witness heard cries from within--heard strokes and
cries as if there was a fight--and passed on. Do you have any doubt
now but that Dr. Cronin was driven to the Carlson cottage? Can you
as twelve men making up your minds upon the evidence have any doubt
but that it was Dr. Cronin who was driven into that cottage? If not
there, tell me where he was driven to."
THE MURDER IN THE COTTAGE.
"Well, we have him entering into the cottage. At 8 o'clock a wagon
was seen coming from the south and a little man was driving and a
tall man was with him, and they drove up to this cottage. This was
after the work was done. This was after the deadly blows were
dealt. They came driving up, and the big man got out. That was
Daniel Coughlin and Kunze--the man who drove him there was
Kunze--who slapped him on the back on the 12th of April and said,
'That is my friend.' He is the man who drove him there. He drove
off with a horse with a brown face. Again at 10 o'clock Daniel
Coughlin and Kunze are seen in a saloon on Lincoln avenue--Nieman's
saloon--walking in there to drown the last bit of feeling they had
in wine. The little German said he would take beer, and O'Sullivan
said, 'Take wine,' O'Sullivan's idea was to take wine upon that
occasion, and O'Sullivan and Coughlin went into the room whispering
to each other and began making up their minds as to what they
should do with the body and counseling together, while the little
German was at the other end of the room. This was at eleven
o'clock, within two blocks of the Carlson cottage. Remember that at
four o'clock on that day, within three or four doors of Ashland
avenue, on Lincoln avenue, this man Kettner, the man who knew
Coughlin and who passed the time of day to him, says Daniel
Coughlin was with another man on that street. No doubt he was
showing this man the route and telling him how to drive. No doubt
this chairman of the committee was then instructing him how to
operate when he was seen at four o'clock in the afternoon in
company with this stranger. At eight or nine o'clock he was seen
with Kunze driving to the cottage, and he was afterward seen in
Nieman's saloon with Kunze. Shortly after that these two men were
seen by Mr. Wardell, who had been down to a neighboring saloon, on
his way home a little before eleven o'clock, and he says one was a
tall man and another was a small man. He says they walked into the
cottage together. Nieman says that after they were in his saloon
he washed his glasses and locked up at eleven o'clock, and Wardell
says he saw these men walking along together--one about the size of
Coughlin and one of O'Sullivan.
DISPOSING OF THE BODY.
"At 11 o'clock the committee of three with the chairman sitting on
the trunk came driving along eastward on Fullerton avenue, and at
half past 11, a block north of Fullerton avenue, the three men were
seen with what seemed to be a carpenter's chest, by Officer Smith,
going north. They were seen by Way, the private watchman, in the
morning of that fatal night; they were seen to get off the wagon;
they were seen to look about the lake, and when this was discovered
they said, 'Where is the Lake Shore Drive?' showing that they had
either missed their way or missed their connection in some way or
else they were getting ready to dispose of their tool chest or
trunk. Follow that back. On their return the wagon was there, but
no trunk and no tool chest, and Officer Smith said to the other
officer, 'Why, that is the same wagon I saw going north about 12
o'clock, and here they come back on Evanston avenue.' Here comes
back the committee of three. They came to return their sealed
verdicts. Their work had been accomplished; they thought that
everything was sealed from the outside world. Have you any doubt as
to what was in that trunk? Have you any doubt as to who guided that
wagon and directed its course? If you have any doubts, tell me who
did it. Here is the evidence piling up pile upon pile. Well, the
night went on. Mr. and Mrs. Conklin slept; the sun rose in the east
on the 5th of May. Dr. Cronin did not appear. Frank Scanlon, the
last friend that saw the Doctor when he rode away, mentioned that
the Doctor said when he was asked when he would come back, 'God
knows when I will get back.' God did not tell him when he would
come back, but God above stands ready to-day to direct this
prosecution aright, and to say that the men who destroyed the life
of that man shall be punished for this terrible crime."
DR. CRONIN IS FIRST MISSED.
"On that Sabbath day no Doctor returns. Dr. Cronin, who had gone to
administer to suffering humanity; Dr. Cronin, who had been full of
hope and ready at all times to stand by and help humanity, was not
returning to his home. Mr. Conklin, who picked up the card from the
mantel board, read upon it, 'P. O'Sullivan's ice house.' He started
for O'Sullivan's residence and asked, 'Did you send for Dr.
Cronin?' 'Why, no.' What would you have thought at that time? What
would you have thought if you had been a brother in the camp with
Dr. Cronin? Would you have stood there as a stone? 'No,' thought
Mr. Conklin, 'this is something wrong,' and he started out to see
what had occurred. Sitting there within 160 feet of where the
deadly blows were struck, sitting there where the wounds were made,
sitting there where the man called for God and Jesus, he never
lifted a finger or undertook to unravel the mystery; and yet do
you believe him innocent under this evidence? Mr. Conklin, who
thought something was wrong, went to Captain Schaack and showed him
this circular that Dr. Cronin had published in reference to the
conspiracy, and begged him to help him hunt for the Doctor, and the
Captain, like a great many others who did not understand Irish
troubles at the time, thought there was nothing in it at that time.
He told him he would look after it, but Mr. Conklin, not satisfied
with that, goes to Mr. Murray, of the Pinkerton agency, and gets
Frank Murray to go out and talk with this man privately about the
contract--why he had made the contract. Well, he did not know but
that there would be some accidents--his men might get drunk and run
over somebody--and his contract was made for that purpose, and he
referred to McGinnis' establishment. Finally Frank Murray induced
him to get into a buggy and go with him. Frank Murray says that
when he talked about the contract, this man, who had deliberately
planned for the life of Dr. Cronin, told him that he happened to
meet Justice Mahoney down town when he made the contract.
"It went on; people were looking in every direction; some thought
that Dr. Cronin, was alive, and others that he was dead. The
community was divided upon the question. Now, I say that Daniel
Coughlin--this man signing the pay rolls of the city and drawing
his salary for protecting the innocent--this man who ought to have
raised his club in defense of the injured--Daniel Coughlin was
hunting for the body that was found in the trunk, on the morning of
the 5th of May. At about 7 o'clock, you recollect, this Thiele and
two others, who were out on that Sabbath morning, found the trunk,
a common trunk with a common lock, unlocked with a common key, and
thrown off there, I suppose, by common hands; full of common blood;
full of blood--the bottom besmeared with blood, the cotton sticking
to the sides and bottom as if a hog had been stuck; as if it had
been running over with blood. This trunk was brought to the
station, and this man Coughlin--this cold-blooded wretch--starts
out----"
"We except," said Mr. Donahoe, rising to his feet.
COUGHLIN SEARCHES FOR THE BODY.
"I submit from the evidence," said Judge Longenecker, "if this
evidence does not make it out, I have no right to say so, but if
this evidence nails him to that cross, in this case, he is a
cold-blooded and heartless wretch. Assuming from the evidence that
his hands are red with the blood of Dr. Cronin, we charge that it
was a cold-blooded affair. He goes out and almost stands on the
catch basin where the body lay--hunting for the body that was in
the trunk. On the morning of the 6th, when the newspapers--for
which my friend Donahoe has such contempt--published the fact that
a white horse had driven Dr. Cronin away, the chief of police, when
this was brought to his attention, gave notice to the entire force
to see who had hired a white horse on the 4th of May. A policeman
appears at Dinan's stable and asked if he had a white horse out,
and he said 'yes,' and he goes to Chicago Avenue Station and sees
Captain Schaack, and when he goes there he also sees Daniel
Coughlin. Coughlin wants to know what is the trouble, and asks him
to say nothing about it, 'because,' he says, 'it is understood I am
an enemy of Dr. Cronin, and Cronin is missing.' That was what
occurred on the 6th day of May. This was the first utterance of
Coughlin in reference to the white horse or to there being any
charge that he was responsible for it. He knew then that Mrs.
Conklin and Frank Scanlon had identified the horse, and he knew,
without having to bring a witness from New Jersey, that the horse
that drove Dr. Cronin away was the horse that his friend got from
this stable.
"You remember now that Coughlin was sent to find the man. Dinan did
not stop there; he sent word to Schaack and Schaack sent to the
chief, and Schaack had his orders from the chief to send Coughlin
to find out who hired the white horse at that time. This was on May
6. Then, if you remember, the evidence shows that they were out
hunting for the object that had evidently been in that trunk, and
did not find it until the 22d day of May."
THE FINDING OF THE BODY.
"On the 22d day of May some men who were looking after the health
of the community, cleaning catch basins in Lake View, lifted the
lid of one of the basins and saw the body of a man. That body was
taken out and brought to the morgue in Lake View, and identified as
that of Dr. Cronin. Up to this time the word had gone out. Coughlin
supposed it was all right. P. O'Sullivan was on his ice wagon again
and handling ice. It was the right kind of business for him to be
in. Up to this time Burke was visiting his friend in Joliet, and at
work in a ditch, telling him that he had been working at the stock
yards. Up to the finding of this body they all thought 'there is no
danger now; our verdict is sealed and it is returned to him alone
[pointing in the direction of Beggs]. No one has a right to know
except the senior guardian; we are in no danger. Dan Coughlin
signed his pay rolls all the same; Patrick O'Sullivan handled his
ice; Burke worked in the ditch, and this body was found. It was
found just half a mile from where that committee of three were seen
at Edgewater--a mile south of Evanston avenue, where they had the
tool chest or trunk seen by Officer Way. One-half mile south in a
catch-basin was found the body of Dr. Cronin. The wagon was seen to
be empty just three-quarters of a mile from where the body was
found and the bloody trunk was found in the bushes. In the
catch-basin there was cotton. In the trunk there was cotton--when
Dr. Cronin left home he had in his arms cotton--and further on just
a quarter of a mile we find that Dr. Cronin's clothes were in a
sewer.
"Recollect that when they were last seen with this trunk it was at
Edgewater, at 1 o'clock. The clothes were found just north of Buena
avenue in the sewer with a satchel, and it turns out now that the
satchel in all its measurements and appearance and quality and size
is identical with that which Simonds bought, and that Burke moved
into the Carlson Cottage. Now, will you tell me, going over the
ground, and seeing that satchel and the trunk on the road and the
clothes in the sewer--with the evidence of the cries in the
cottage--the card of O'Sullivan taking him there, will you tell me
that you have any doubt as to where this crime was committed or
that Dr. Cronin was killed in that cottage?
"You can not hesitate upon that question. Then who did it? Go right
back to the beginning; follow it up with all that we have told you
in reference to these men and can you come to any other conclusion
than that these men are guilty?"
THE DISCOVERY OF THE COTTAGE.