VIOLATIONS OF CAMP RULES.

"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 nothingin 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 wasthat 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 committeethat 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 otherevidence, 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 findthat 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 Beggswrote 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 ofthe 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 youwill 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 engagedin 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 makea 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 thatevening, 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, sayingthat 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. Sheidentifies 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 outand 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 afterthey 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.

"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 nothingin 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.

"'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 wasthat 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."

"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.'

"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 committeethat 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."

"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 otherevidence, 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."

"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 findthat 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.

"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.

"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 Beggswrote 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 ofthe 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 youwill 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."

"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 engagedin 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."

"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."

"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 makea 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.'"

"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."

"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."

"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."

"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.

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 thatevening, 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, sayingthat he had a low-crowned, narrow-brimmed hat, and that his face was dirty as if it had not been shaven."

"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. Sheidentifies 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.

"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 outand 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."

"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 afterthey 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.

Back to IndexNext