Coughlin telling the chief of police, when asked about the man for whom he hired the horse and buggy, that it was Smith--all this is sufficient. The chief asked: 'Where did you know Smith?' and Coughlin answered 'John Ryan, of Hanc.o.c.k, sent him to me.' When in Winnipeg Burke was asked to whom he wrote, and he said: 'John Ryan, of Hanc.o.c.k, Mich.--my friend.' Coughlin said to the chief: 'John Ryan, of Hanc.o.c.k, Mich., sent him to me.'"

THE GREAT CONSPIRACY.

"See the connection; see the arrangements! Take Coughlin's statement that the white horse and buggy was hired for a man named Smith. He was so anxious, so careful to tell Dinan not to say anything about it, because it might get him into trouble; yet he pretended to tell Captain Schaack, as proved by Whalen, that he saw Smith and didn't bring him in when he had instructions to find him.

He told Dinan that he had worn out the leather of his shoes hunting for Smith, and yet when he sees this man, who is drawing all the trouble upon him, he didn't even bring him to the station. Away with the Smith story!

"Martin Burke, as soon as the body is discovered, is found in Winnipeg. We find him there under an a.s.sumed name, on his way to Europe. He is brought back under the laws of extradition on this charge of murder. For days and weeks before he could be removed he put the courts to the trouble of investigating as to whether he should return or not. Martin Burke flies away from Camp 20. Martin Burke leaves his friend Coughlin, his friend O'Sullivan. He goes away from his camp off to Winnipeg. He said he had been in Hanc.o.c.k, Mich., working for Ryan. If Burke rented the Carlson cottage for a lawful purpose, why should he go to Winnipeg and thence to the old country? Why should he flee the State of Illinois? It is because Martin Burke moved the furniture into the Carlson cottage for an unlawful purpose; it is because Martin Burke was in the cottage and dealt the blows that put out the life of Dr. Cronin; it is because his hands were red with the blood of a human being.

"Colleran testified that Martin Burke and Coughlin were together outside of the lodge. Colleran tells you that he met him on the Sunday night after the discovery of the body, and that he said he had been working in the stock-yards, when in fact he had been in Joliet."

"That was before the discovery of the body," interrupted Mr.

Forrest.

"You are right," said the State's Attorney; "it was just before the discovery of the body. Well, Burke disappears. There may be something that I have omitted in this matter. As I said, the clothing was found in the sewer--Dr. Cronin's coat, his vest, his pants. Dr. Cronin's box of splints; Dr. Cronin's satchel and instruments, his cards--all were found in this sewer on the line that that wagon was driven on that fatal night. That is beyond question.

"Now, gentlemen, I have gone over the evidence as rapidly as I could, and yet at the same time kept it in connection as I understand it. There may be a great many things, and there are, that I have omitted; but my intention has been to keep your minds directed to the chain of circ.u.mstances. And if you want to get at this case, if you want to boil it down, if you want to write the history of the case, you are to write:

"'I contracted for medical services'--Patrick O'Sullivan. 'I contracted for the cottage.'--Martin Burke. 'I contracted for the horse and buggy for my friend.'--Daniel Coughlin. Then draw your line and write 'Committee of Three.' Write again: 'I contracted for your life.'--Patrick O'Sullivan. 'I contracted for the horse and buggy to drive you to death?'--Dan Coughlin. 'I rented the cottage in which to strike out your life.'--Martin Burke. Write again: 'The committee reports to this senior guardian alone.'"

JUDGE LONGENECKER CLOSES.

"Gentlemen, I have finished. I hope you will pardon me for having detained you so long. I know how anxious you are, while you may be ever so willing to sit here for weeks and months if necessary, yet you can not help but be anxious to be with your families. Yet, as a duty you owe to the public, as a duty you owe the defendants, as a duty to society, you must be patient until you hear what the others have to say in this important case. For three long months my a.s.sociates have held up my hands; they have been with me night and day. They have encouraged me. It was necessary to have a.s.sistance in this case; able counsel as they are, it requires it. No one knows unless he has had the experience what it is to be left with a case of this character on his hands. No one knows unless he has had the experience, what is it to get at the bottom of a conspiracy of this character. Therefore, I have felt the necessity of these men who have sat by me for the last three months, and I want you, no matter what may be said, to feel that the people of the State of Illinois have as much right to demand the best talent the city affords, as due to men that come up out of the sewers. While these men are able, men of ability, men of standing, men of reputation, understand that this was a terrible crime; understand that this was a terrible conspiracy; understand that the very men, the officers of the law, who ought to have held up my hands, were divided against me; understand that in this case men drawing their salaries from the police department of our city stood in league with the men who struck out the life of Dr. Cronin. And while I compliment, not as a compliment, but as well deserved on their part, these a.s.sociates of mine for their ability, don't understand that I under-estimate Judge Wing and Mr. Forrest and Mr. Donahoe and Mr.

Foster. On the other side sit as good talent as was ever brought into a court-room. I say it without flattery, that if these men hang for the murder, they could have asked for no better men to have defended them than the gentlemen on my left. Coming out of the sewer, coming out of the chilly ice wagon, coming from the pay-rolls of the city, coming from the bar room, coming from the paint brush--these men have held his Honor and yourselves for over three long months; and if your verdict shall be that they hang on the scaffold they can not claim that they have had no time to call upon the holy Trinity.

"Gentlemen, when you come to consider your verdict, when you come to make up your minds, when, as I believe you will do, you undertake to render a truthful verdict on the law and the evidence, I want you to remember the facts in the case. I want you to look at this mountain of evidence that we have been building up and up before you until it has risen high, until it stands out with its mountain peaks illuminated by the sunshine of truth, until all who are not blind may see that these men are the murderers of Dr.

Cronin. These mountain peaks stand prominently forth. This contract of O'Sullivan's, this hiring of the buggy, this renting of the cottage, this running to Canada; all these point to the fact that these men are the guilty ones. It stands up like a mountain built of truth, as solid as the granite hills against which the Coughlin, the Burke, the O'Sullivan, the Beggs, the Kunze alibis can not prevail.

"I leave the matter now in your hands. I have had this case on my hands for months and months. I feel now that the responsibility rests with you. I put it in your hands, believing confidently and expecting that you will do what your best judgment dictates. When you come to consider your verdict, think of the 4th day of May; think of that man gathering his little valise and instruments; think of him bringing to his bosom the cotton to relieve suffering; think of the splints in the box; think of his rushing out to the buggy; think of his crowded seat; think of him moving north to relieve suffering humanity. See him enter as a gentleman into the cottage; hear his cries of G.o.d and Jesus when, without giving him time to utter the other Trinity name, he was felled to the floor.

Think of his wounds in his head; think of the grave in which he was placed; think of all these in making up your penalty, and may it be such a verdict as when His Honor p.r.o.nounces judgment on it, that he, having an eye to G.o.d, may say: 'May the Lord have mercy on your souls.'"

Judge Longenecker received the congratulations of his colleagues for the able manner in which he had presented his case, and the Court inquired if Judge Wing wished to proceed at once. Judge Wing said he was ready to proceed if the Court desired he should go on.

AN APPEAL FOR COUGHLIN.

Judge Wing's address to the jury on behalf of Daniel Coughlin was an able effort, lasting over two days. He took the ground that there was absolutely no evidence whatever against his client, and quoted numerous cases in the criminal records of New York, Chicago and other cities to demonstrate the fact that circ.u.mstantial evidence was totally unreliable, and that it would be monstrous if a man's guilt or innocence were to be based upon a previous conviction. He urged that prejudice should not effect the verdict, and that the jury should not be biased against his client simply because he was a member of the Clan-na-Gael. The whole case, he said, was circ.u.mstantial, was interwoven with doubts, contradictions and possibilities, so as to be practically of no strength whatever when taken in a ma.s.s. Counsel reviewed the testimony of other witnesses for the State as it affected Coughlin, casting doubt on the evidence of Mertes, the milkman, scoring Major Sampson, and insisting there was no absolute proof that it was Dinan's white horse that drove the Physician to his death. Speaking of Sampson, he asked the members of the jury if they were going to act upon the word of a thief. Could they look the prisoner's wife in the face and say to her, "I sent your husband to prison upon the words of Major Sampson?" Could they go to his children and say to them, "I have made you, by my verdict the children of a felon. I have put eternal griefs upon you upon the words of a man who goes about the country with public speakers, seeking sporting privileges, and working 'Grangers' with the 'sh.e.l.l game?'" As to the knife episode, he said, that never since crime was committed by man had anyone heard of a guilty man keeping souvenirs of his crime, or preserving such evidences of his guilt. Never in the history of the world had such a thing occurred. The speaker went into the Camp 20 phase of the evidence, insisting there was an absolute lack of proof that any conspiracy had existed. He touched upon the telephone messages that pa.s.sed between Coughlin and O'Sullivan, saying it was impossible that murderers or men plotting murder would trust a message to a fellow-conspirator through a telephone.

[Ill.u.s.tration: R. M. WING, ONE OF COUNSEL FOR DEFENSE.]

He elaborated on the necessity of absolute proof of the cause of death, arguing that no one but a physician could definitely determine the cause of death, and unless it was shown beyond a doubt that the death of Dr. Cronin was caused as shown in the indictment, it was the duty of the jury to find the prisoners innocent. One of the most vital points in the case, the cause of the death of Dr. Cronin, remained unproved, and until this was settled, and settled beyond a doubt, the charge could not hold good and the defendants could not be convicted. Judge Wing dissected the evidence of the medical experts at length, ridiculing them mercilessly, casting doubt upon the theory of the State, that the blood found in the Carlson cottage was that of a human being. He concluded his address in these words:

"Gentlemen, I have tried to discuss this case fairly and conscientiously. We are about to part, and I beg you, in conclusion, not to go off upon any prejudice, or upon any pa.s.sion or upon any suspicion. I beg of you to give these men a fair show.

I believe you will do that. I beg of you to remember that a certain conclusion can only be reached after you have traveled on sure and certain ground. Do what you think is right under the law, gentlemen, and I do not doubt you will."

COUNSELOR INGHAM'S SPEECH.

Mr. Geo. W. Ingham, in behalf of the State, followed Mr. Donahoe with a forcible review of the evidence, and which was listened to with intense interest by every one within reach of his voice. He prefaced his remarks by saying that the sanct.i.ty of human life in America was in the keeping of the juries of America. The law provided that a man guilty of murder should be punished, but it provided no method for its own enforcement, save that which was invested in twelve men. To that number of men it was entrusted. The jury came from the body of the county, and so it was that peace and good order of every community was in the keeping of its own citizens. In every criminal case the jury held in one hand the rights of the prisoners, and, to a certain extent, it held in the other hand the good name and the peace of the community in which it lived. This was a responsibility already great, but which increased in direct proportion to the enormity of the offense under consideration. Yet no responsibility could be greater than that of the twelve men before him. Only a few months before, Patrick Henry Cronin, a citizen of the State of Illinois, a resident of the great metropolis, living in fancied security and within the very shadow of the court-house in which they were now sitting, was lured from his home upon a mission of murder. Fired by professional zeal, moved by the instincts of humanity which his choice of a profession indicated, he rushed to the a.s.sistance of a suffering man.

Suspecting nothing, he went out, armed, as it were, with the very instruments of his skill and profession, and then rushed into the slaughter-house prepared for his reception and death.

Then, as if the white face of death itself was not sufficient to satiate human hatred, his body was subjected to the indignity and ignominy of burial in a filthy sewer. This man, to whom sacred burial in consecrated ground was a right to which he always looked forward, was thrown into a sewer. The crime was singular in its brutality, but its brutality was not its startling feature. Why was Dr. Cronin slain? Because he was condemned to die. Condemned for what? For no offense within the laws of the State of Illinois.

Condemned and executed by whom? By a tribunal that was unlawfully const.i.tuted, a tribunal that was at the same time, accuser, witness, judge and executioner. It was a tribunal which within itself in the light of day, which existed upon a territory of the State to whom its members hold allegiance, a tribunal which was treasonable to the laws of the State, the juries were called upon to execute and to the laws of the State whose protection it had a right to claim. Who could have dreamed that such a thing was possible in the State of Illinois? Who could say that six months from that day he could not be repeated in the State of Illinois.

Only the twelve men who were trying the case. That was their responsibility, for their oath in the case was to well and truly try and true deliverance make between the people of the State of Illinois and the defendants, to well and truly try them upon the law and upon the evidence.

[Ill.u.s.tration: GEORGE C. INGHAM, ONE OF COUNSEL FOR PROSECUTION.]

From this introduction, Mr. Ingham branched off into an elaborate dissertation of the law regarding murder and the power of circ.u.mstantial evidence. Numerous authorities on circ.u.mstantial evidence were cited from. Counsel dwelt upon Coughlin's hatred of Cronin, upon the purchase of the furniture and upon the peculiar actions of the defense. Stress was laid upon the fact, that no evidence had been produced with a view of showing that it was not Martin Burke that rented the Carlson cottage, and that he engaged the expressman to move the furniture from the Clark street flat to Lake View. The general outline of the plot as disclosed by the evidence was considered, and the conclusion drawn, that the right men were on trial. Continuing, Mr. Ingham said:

"Now, I want to call your attention to one fact, that not one attempt has been made at defense. The counsel for the defense have done the best they could. I know the counsel for the defense well.

I know Forrest, and have known him for years, and have tried cases with and against him. I know he would go far and near and would remove heaven and earth, were it possible, to save his clients. I know that he believes thoroughly and heartily in the maxim of old Lord Brougham, that a lawyer should know but one man in the world, and that man his client. I have known Daniel Donahoe for years, and I know his ability. I have not known Judge Wing for so long a time, but from what I have seen of him and know of him I know him to be a skillful lawyer. His address to you, gentlemen of the jury, proves his ability, and I say to you unhesitatingly, that these men, after doing everything in their power to aid their clients, have utterly and signally failed. I ask you to remember that not one particle of evidence has been introduced by the defense either to dispose or disprove the evidence I have stated to you. Not one particle of evidence has been admitted to be proved and to be denied here, except the single statement that Burke was at the cottage on the night of the murder. There is evidence, however, which more than outweighs all the alibis they can bring here.

"The saloon-keeper came upon the stand here and plainly and clearly told you that on the night of the 4th of May, about half-past 10 o'clock, three men entered his saloon. He tells you he is positive one of them was Patrick O'Sullivan. He knows him, buys ice of him, and has no earthly reason to give evidence to injure him unless it was true. He says also that the other was a taller man, and in his opinion he believes that man was Coughlin; further, there was a little man who spoke with a German accent, and that man he says he is sure was Kunze. Now, you will remember he had only bought that saloon a few days before, and he can hardly be mistaken in the night, because he tells you he knows it was on the Sat.u.r.day night, because on the night following, the Sunday night, he had an opening, and, like other Germans, he never had less than fifteen to twenty-five men at his bar. What object could he have in testifying against Patrick O'Sullivan, Coughlin and Kunze, and saying they were the men who drank wine and took cigars at his bar? Is he corroborated? Let us see. The saloon-keeper is admittedly as honest a man as there is in Chicago. No attempt has been made to impeach his evidence, and I ask you to consider whether or not he is corroborated. Let me draw your attention to the evidence given by the German gardener named Wardell. They left the saloon about 11 o'clock or a quarter after, the saloon-keeper says, and you will remember that Wardell says he left a saloon near by about twenty minutes after, and just at that time he happened to raise his eyes and saw in front of him two men, whom he describes, and believes to be O'Sullivan and Coughlin, and he saw them walk down to and enter the Carlson cottage. Where was the third man? Do you remember that about a half hour after that time, about half a mile south of the Carlson cottage, a wagon was seen with a trunk in it? The two men who went into the Carlson cottage went in there to help carry out the trunk containing Cronin's body and the clothes, while the third man went down and got the wagon that was to take the body and the clothes away.

"Now, how is that met? We are told that the saloon-keeper is mistaken, that this man never saw O'Sullivan and Coughlin and Kunze, but that on the Sunday night Patrick O'Sullivan went there to that very saloon with the two Hylands, and that they had two gla.s.ses of wine and a cigar each. Gentlemen, you will remember that the saloon-keeper, who is a German, distinctly said that the smaller man asked for beer and spoke with a German accent. The younger Hyland never spoke with a German accent in his life. Which do you propose to believe--Neiman, the saloon-keeper, who has no earthly interest whatever in giving false testimony against O'Sullivan or the friends of Patrick O'Sullivan? These two strangers who go to see him for the first time are compelled to stay and take dinner, and are then taken out to the saloon and each given two gla.s.ses of wine and a cigar at the expense of O'Sullivan.

Remember, gentlemen, he had never seen these two Hylands before that Sunday afternoon. The truth is, that when they say those three men were in that saloon, the two Hylands and O'Sullivan, they admit unconsciously the fact that three men were there, as the saloon-keeper testified; they admit that O'Sullivan was there and the thing is narrowed down to a simple question of veracity between the saloon-keeper on the one hand and the Hylands on the other.

There is much more reason, vastly more reason, I submit, why the evidence of the saloon-keeper, who knew O'Sullivan perfectly, should be believed in preference to that of the two Hylands, who are ready to swear anything to help their friend out of a sc.r.a.pe.

Now, what else is disputed?

"An attempt is also made to dispute that portion of the evidence tending to show that O'Sullivan was at the Carlson cottage. How is it done? Again they resort to an alibi. As I said to you in the opening of this case, and I will now repeat, that if O'Sullivan was at home and in bed at the time the murder was committed, and you are satisfied from the evidence that he was engaged in that conspiracy, he is just as guilty as if he struck the fatal blow himself. Against the testimony of Neiman, who saw him there with Coughlin and Kunze in that saloon, and of Wardell, who saw him and Coughlin enter the Carlson cottage after they left the saloon, they produce the evidence of Mulcahey, a man who became connected with O'Sullivan under the most suspicious circ.u.mstances. That man testified that he came to Chicago a perfect stranger; that he went to O'Sullivan--went to his house on the 31st of April--was instantly taken in and kept and boarded there, slept in the same bed with O'Sullivan, rolled around the street in the ice wagon and slept with him on the night of the murder. He swears also that he was with O'Sullivan when old Carlson claimed to have heard the conversation between O'Sullivan and Burke; he swears also that he heard Coughlin and O'Sullivan arrange that O'Sullivan was to keep his eye upon Kunze and report if he saw him in Lake View. In short, gentlemen, he was a very convenient sort of witness. What was he doing there all the month? He was not working for O'Sullivan, yet he slept in the same bed with him--a perfect stranger, and, strange as it may appear, he only went into the employ of O'Sullivan a few days before the murder. I undertake to say, gentlemen, that his testimony is false, that O'Sullivan was not in bed, that on the contrary he and Burke and Coughlin were engaged in the murder at the Carlson cottage. Who is there that corroborates his testimony?

The two women, a cousin of O'Sullivan's by marriage and his sister.

Tom Whelan was too sound a sleeper to know whether O'Sullivan was in bed or was up or out, and they ask you to believe that sort of an alibi against the evidence you have on the part of the prosecution."

KUNZE'S PART IN THE MURDER.

"What is the evidence against Kunze? He was the friend, the tool of Coughlin. It is in evidence that he had been engaged with Dan Coughlin in working up the distillery case. How much of a detective he is I do not know, but I don't suppose he is a very great one. If I were to guess at it I should say he was a detective's stool pigeon.

"He had been engaged with Coughlin for months. Mertes swears that he saw him drive their horse with a white face up to the cottage the night of the murder, and you will remember that he picked him out from a number of men. Mertes is a countryman of Kunze's, and he would not be likely to testify against his own countryman unless truth compelled him to do so. He tells you that Kunze drove a horse and buggy up to that Carlson cottage at 8:30 o'clock on the night of the murder, and, more than that, it is in evidence that Kunze was perfectly at home in the rooms at 117 Clark street, and was seen by a very intelligent witness sitting in front of the window washing his feet. Now, what was he doing at 117 South Clark street, if he was not engaged in that conspiracy? The men who engaged that flat at 117 Clark street, those conspirators, were not going to trust their lives to men they did not know; and the truth is that he was the tool of Coughlin. More than that, it is in evidence that he said he expected to be arrested on the Cronin business. Why?

Why? I repeat."

"Because I was told so," suddenly cried Kunze, springing to his feet.

"This man is defended by able lawyers," retorted Mr. Ingham, "and on their heads is the responsibility of his defense."

"G.o.d knows I am innocent of the murder of Dr. Cronin," cried Kunze, again springing to his feet, and there was a scene of excitement for a few minutes. Finally his counsel forced him to his seat, and induced him to remain quiet.

"Why did he say he expected to be arrested on the Cronin business?

I repeat," continued Mr. Ingham. "It was because he felt he was connected with that business. Coughlin knew him, Coughlin had worked with him, and Coughlin knew that in this case their lives were safe in his hands. It is in evidence that shortly after the murder he was with Patrick O'Sullivan drinking, and you will remember a conversation which was detailed by a saloon-keeper, and which occurred shortly before the murder, wherein Patrick O'Sullivan made a bargain to sell to Kunze the bay horse with a white face. Why was that horse sold to Kunze, this little painter who was working around the country, this man who was in the employ of the detective and trusted by Coughlin? Will you, gentlemen of the jury, tell me why O'Sullivan, who lived at the rear of the Carlson cottage, and whose stable almost ab.u.t.ted on the cottage, was selling this poor painter a horse?"

WHOM THE EVIDENCE POINTS TO.