Longenecker compared this pa.s.sage of Beggs' letter with the motion of Henry Owen O'Connor, carried by Camp 20, directing the senior guardian to notify the district officer "of the report going around regarding reports of the trial committee being read in one of the camps of this city."

"That motion was carried by the camp," said Mr. Longenecker, "but it seems that Mr. Beggs had found out what camp that report had been read in and all about it before he wrote as directed to Mr.

Spelman."

Having alluded pa.s.singly to the pa.s.sage in Beggs' letter protesting against the initiation of members into camps before their names were presented to Camp 20 and the central officers for ratification, which he said was in line with O'Sullivan's charge that U. O. D. men were being admitted to Cronin's camp, Mr.

Longenecker took up Spelman's reply to this letter of Beggs. In this letter, which was dated Feb. 17, Spelman asked Beggs to refer him to that section of the law by which he was empowered to inflict a penalty on a senior guardian for disclosing the proceedings of a trial committee.

In this letter also Mr. Beggs refers to "certain men who want to lead in Irish affairs" as "scamps," and says he "is disgusted with their conduct." The reply of Beggs to this letter, dated February 18, was then read. In this Beggs says he knows of no "written law"

under which a penalty could be inflicted for the offense alluded to in his first letter. "No man in his right senses," he declared, "would deny that such conduct was prejudicial to the good of the order." Mr. Beggs in this letter also deplores the "opening of the old sore," and says that as the majority of the members believed "the parties charged to be innocent," created ill feeling and blasted the hopes of the friends of Irish unity. Beggs also said he would not notice the matter alluded to, as he thought it better not to notice such matters, only he was ordered to do so by the vote of the camp. "But I am only one man," said Beggs, "but the men who are in power will in time realize the motives of those who are continually breeding disorder in the ranks. I am very much discouraged at the present outlook, but hope no trouble will result in the meantime."

Mr. Longenecker asked significantly what Beggs was talking about in this latter portion of his letter. A comparison of his utterances with the evidence of Thomas F. and Henry Owen O'Connor showed that Beggs was referring to Cronin, and to the report which he had read in his own camp, charging the ex-executives with being thieves and robbers and with putting Irishmen behind English prison bars. What did Spelman mean when he said he had hoped for a reunion and for better results? To whom did Beggs refer when he spoke of "these men who are continually breeding disorder in the ranks?" It was evident that they were talking about Cronin.

"On the 22d of February," continued the State's Attorney, "when Patrick McGarry made the same charge that this ex-executive was composed of thieves and robbers, at the reunion meeting John F.

Beggs stood up and said he would not submit to any such charges being made in his camp, and he slapped his breast and thanked G.o.d that he was a friend of Alexander Sullivan's.

"On the 19th of February, Throckmorton said the man named Simonds came there and inquired and rented the flat at 117 Clark street.

Now we have a meeting on February 22d. You recollect what Patrick McGarry stated at that meeting, and, for the purpose of showing you just what he did say, I would like to read from the record, but, after glancing through the papers on the table, I fear I have neglected to bring it from my office."

Judge Longenecker had now spoken for over four hours, and a recess was ordered until ten o'clock on the following morning (November 30), and at that hour the State's Attorney resumed his speech, as follows:

"If the Court please, and Gentlemen, Mr. Foster was right in regard to my statement about Spelman. It had reference to the circular letter which he said was not addressed originally to Beggs, and that evidence had nothing to do with this case.

"On yesterday evening I wanted to call your attention to what was said and done on the meeting of the 22d of February--this reunion.

You remember that Mr. Beggs spoke of it in his letter to Spelman; not to forget their reunion. At that meeting speeches were made by different parties, and among them Patrick McGarry made a speech, and John F. Beggs, the senior guardian of Camp 20, answered that speech. You may not remember just what was said on that occasion. I will now read just what Patrick McGarry said about it."

Judge Longenecker proceeded to read from a typewritten ma.n.u.script 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 inst.i.tutions; that was good. How they should educate them also to have love for their mothers and fathers and forefathers' homes; that there was nothing in the Irish race and nothing in Irish history that Irishmen should be ashamed of in America; that is true."

The State's Attorney proceeded to recite the testimony of McGarry, as before published, in regard to the speech that he had made at this celebrated reunion meeting at Camp 20.

"'I said I agreed in my remarks with what all three gentlemen had said. I said it was all very well to talk of unity, and I wanted to see unity among Irish people; that there could not be unity while the members of this organization would meet on dark streets and back alleys to villify and abuse a man who had the courage to stand up and attack the treachery and robbery of the triangle. I said that I was educating children, and as long as G.o.d allowed me to be over them, I would educate them first in American principles, and I also wanted to educate them that, if they got an opportunity to strike a blow for Ireland's freedom, they would do so. I told them that I had been investigating Le Caron's record, and I said there were men in this organization that were worse than Le Caron. I said that the man who gave Le Caron his credentials to go into the convention was a greater scoundrel than ever Le Caron could pretend to be. I said that I had found out that Le Caron's camp did not exist for two years, and they did not have a meeting, and the junior guardian, as given in the directory down in Braidwood, had been for a year at Spring Valley, and I said that they must have known that such a camp could not exist only on paper.'"

Judge Longenecker went on to review the testimony of McGarry in reference to this famous meeting, and next called the attention of the jury to the conduct of John F. Beggs, the senior guardian of Camp 20, on that occasion.

VIOLATIONS OF CAMP RULES.

"'Now remember,' he said, 'that Alexander Sullivan's name had not been mentioned; the triangle had not been mentioned, and John F.

Beggs said that visiting members were coming in there and violating the hospitality of the camp, and that would have to be stopped--that it was cowardly,' and, says McGarry: 'I wanted to interrupt him, but the presiding officer and chairman at that time would not let me interrupt him.' When he used the word coward, he said that they came in there talking about Alexander Sullivan, and it was cowardly, and he said that they talked about a man behind his back; 'why don't they say it to his face?' He said that Alexander Sullivan had strong friends in that camp, and he slapped his breast and said that he 'was one of them.' That was Beggs'

speech on the 22d of February--this same senior guardian, who was called upon to appoint a secret committee to investigate why Dr.

Cronin had read a minority report in his camp charging Alexander Sullivan and the rest of the triangle with squandering the funds.

On this occasion it was admitted that Alexander Sullivan was not a member of the organization, but he was and had been a member of the executive body--a member of the triangle--and Beggs having mentioned his name in his speech, McGarry had charged this corruption, and then it was that this man Beggs said he would not submit to it, and that it was cowardly for them to talk about it.

He said that Alexander Sullivan had strong friends in that camp, and he slapped his breast and said: 'I am one of them,' 'I wanted to get the floor to reply to him,' said McGarry; 'I said the gentleman had said it was cowardly, and I wanted him to understand that I was no coward; that I would tell Alexander Sullivan either there or on any other ground what my opinion of him was, and that every man who knew me knew what Pat was. I said, Why did you mention Alexander Sullivan's name? I have not mentioned it; I have not heard it mentioned here until the senior guardian of this camp mentioned it. I have said, and I repeat, that the man who gave Le Caron his credentials is a greater scoundrel than Le Caron could ever pretend to be. I said I did not mention his name until it was brought out, and then John F. Beggs said that Alexander Sullivan had strong friends in the camp, and he was one of them, and that he was for union and unity among Irish people if it took war to bring it about.'

"Now this occurred on the 22d of February. The senior guardian was then defending the triangle. Dr. Cronin had been charging the triangle with misappropriation of the funds--and what else? He had been charging them with worse than murder. He had been charging that they not only robbed the treasury, but that they had sent innocent men to English prisons; that they had sent men behind the bars in order to protect their own thievery. He had charged upon this triangle, as Thomas O'Connor stated in his speech, in his minority report which he had read to his camp, the scoundrelism of these men; and here we find this senior guardian"--and the State's Attorney turned round and pointed to Beggs--"on the 22d of February defending them and saying that they had friends and he was glad to say that he was one of them. Now, gentlemen, remember that this was on the 22d day of February, two days after the carpet had been nailed down in the flat at 117 Clark street; five days after the notorious letter that the senior guardian had written Spelman to find out something that he knew all about--writing to this district member to investigate a matter that he knew all about."

THE CONNECTION WITH THE MURDER.

"What else? We find that on the following meeting on the 1st of March--it is in evidence here by Henry Owen O'Connor--that as he was leaving the hall, Daniel Coughlin, the chairman of the committee, followed him into the ante room, and said to Henry Owen O'Connor, 'there are other Le Carons here among us.' He knew how Henry Owen O'Connor's heart went out to Ireland. He knew how patriotism burned in his heart; he knew that Henry Owen O'Connor was loyal to his people. He thought by prejudicing him in that direction he would surround their action with another friend. What does he do? He says 'it is rumored around that there is another Le Caron, and we have got it pretty straight that it is Dr. Cronin.'

This was on the 1st day of March, on Friday night.

"Singular, is it not? Here on the 8th day of February, the date on which the motion was made for that committee--on the 16th of February the senior guardian writing about it and on the 17th writing about it; on the 19th renting the flat; on the 20th nailing the carpet down, and on the 22d defending the triangle, and on the 1st of March this man, who is on trial now for his life, says that Dr. Cronin is a spy. Why was this done? Why should he tell that he was a spy? Following along on the same line it was uttered on February 8 that there were spies in the camp; on the 22d they talked about spies, and now it was whispered into the ears of Henry Owen O'Connor that this man, Cronin, was a spy. They knew how the Irish people despised a man who was pointed out as a spy, therefore, he began his work of prejudicing the minds of those Irishmen who were in earnest in reference to the freedom of Ireland, and tells O'Connor that Cronin was a spy, but Henry Owen O'Connor turned on his heel and would not have it and said: 'I don't believe it,' and walked away. Now, what do we find? We find this: That a conspiracy began in Camp 20 on the 8th of February.

Following that, as I stated, were the remarks made by this man Coughlin, and remarks by Beggs. Now, we go on to another meeting in this camp. Was that committee appointed? I stated on yesterday that we did not contend that it was a trial committee. We never have contended that it was wanted for the purpose of trying Dr. Cronin or any one else; no such statement has been made, but that there was a request for a secret committee, is undisputed.

"Now was it appointed? We find that either on the 3d of May or on the 10th--that does not matter--one of the witnesses, I think Henry Owen O'Connor, states that it was on the 3d of May, soon after he came home from the East, there was a meeting. On cross-examination by Mr. Foster, his attention was called to the matter that he was investigating as a committee-man in regard to auditing the books, and by that he thinks probably it might have been the 10th--the following meeting. That does not matter; but Nolan, the other secretary, the one who keeps the names and numbers of the different members and their accounts--the financial secretary--states that it was on the night of the 3d. Here are two undisputed witnesses uncontradicted by any man in Camp 20; not a man that dare lift up his hand to G.o.d and say that these men have sworn falsely. Here they come into court and make a statement that is undisputed. Was the committee appointed?

"On the night of the 3d or the 10th--I do not care which night it was--some one in the crowd asked the senior guardian if the secret or private committee had reported. The senior guardian, with his hand uplifted, said: 'That committee reports to me alone.' That was John F. Beggs! 'Has that committee reported?' 'That committee reports to the senior guardian alone.'

THE PLOT TO MURDER CRONIN.

"Had he reference to the trial committee? Why, no. They contended they had been urging for that committee's report; would he have made such a remark as that if it had reference to the trial committee that tried the triangle? No, gentlemen, it had reference to this secret committee that had been appointed by John F. Beggs; and to show you that he had appointed it, on the 29th day of April, over on the South Side of this city, as is testified to by his friend Spelman, the district officer--on the 29th day of April what did he say? He said, 'That matter has all been amicably settled.'

How settled? At the hour he spoke the cottage had been rented; at the hour he spoke the arrangements had been made; at the hour he spoke the sentence had been fixed; at the hour he spoke it had been 'amicably' settled--that was on the 29th day of April. Is there anything in the camp that shows it was amicably settled? Has there been a man to come here to say they visited Dr. Cronin's camp to investigate why he read this report! Has there been a man that dare come to the front and say that any investigation had been made--that anything had been done? No. Then, why was it that this man, Beggs, said that it had been amicably settled? Because the committee had agreed that certain things had to be done, and that they would be done, and therefore there was no occasion for any further investigation. That is why he told Spelman on the 29th of April that this matter had been amicably settled. It had been.

"Following that, when he says, 'That committee reports to me alone,' it is no wonder he made that remark, knowing in his heart what had been done; knowing the results that were to follow, no wonder he said 'That committee reports to the senior guardian alone.'

"Now, if he made that remark--that it was to report to him alone--where is the man that will a.s.sert that there was no committee appointed? We do not contend that there was a committee appointed as provided by the const.i.tution in a legitimate way in their order. There is no such contention here; but that they a.s.sumed to appoint a committee; that they did appoint a committee, and that that committee was a committee of three. We contend that that was done for the purpose of covering up the deeds of these men that followed the appointment of the committee. You remember. There is nothing said about the appointing the committee to try Dr.

Cronin--nothing is said about the appointing the committee to do anything except to find out how it was that this was done. If it had been intended to do anything in an honorable way--in a way that they must, to be honorable to themselves and the society, and appointed that committee as Denis O'Connor said, to go up and find out about the matter and report back--then it might be considered as of nothing. But they didn't do it. Tell me that it was 'amicably settled!' What had they done in the camp? What report had been made? What steps had been taken to investigate the matter? No one knows except the senior guardian and his committee just what was said or done."

THE LAW OF CONSPIRACY.

"Now, gentlemen, I shall not bother you by reading much law at this time. As I stated, I want to go over the evidence, but at this point I want to call your attention, before entering upon the other evidence, to the Spies case. I will only read from the syllabus, and leave the case for others who may wish to refer to it, either on the side of the people or on the side of the defense. I want to call your attention to the law of conspiracy as laid down in that case." [Here Judge Longenecker read a long extract bearing on the point that where two or more persons combine to do an illegal act, they are all guilty, whether they are all present at the consummation of the crime or not.] He then proceeded: "That is all I desire to read you upon the law of conspiracy. We have talked about Camp 20 and actions of this order, and we now come up to another part of the case. You will remember that Throckmorton, of the real estate agency of Marshall & Knight, on Clark Street, told you that a man by the name of Simonds appeared there on the 18th of March and inquired in reference to a flat. He wanted to rent two rooms on the upper floor of 117 Clark street. The agent told him they had two rooms on the floor below, and he said he didn't want them--that he preferred to have those on the upper floor, fronting on Clark street. You will remember that he stated that they could not rent two rooms in that flat and he would have to rent the entire flat, and the man said he would see Mr. Marshall concerning it. Next day, the 19th, the man appeared again at the office, and Throckmorton saw Mr. Marshall, who would not rent two rooms and said he would have to take the entire flat. The fellow said all right, and paid them $40 for the top flat, which, as you will remember, was in the neighborhood of Dr. Cronin's office, just opposite the Chicago Opera House building. You will further remember that Throckmorton testified that the man pulled the money out of his pocket in a careless way and paid $40. I don't know whether he understood why he wanted the front rooms at that time, but he paid a month's rent and signed a lease. Mr. Marshall corroborates that statement."

THE PURCHASE OF THE FURNITURE.

"On the same day this man, J. B. Simonds, appeared at Revell's store. Now, it does not matter whether we have shown that he was a member of Camp 20 or any thing about it. It does not matter whether we know who he is, but it is part of the means used in this case, and for that reason it was admitted in evidence. He said to Hatfield, the salesman, that he wanted some of the cheapest furniture he could get. He was taken to the department where the cheapest furniture is kept. He was quick and firm in his selections. When he was shown a cheap bedstead he said, 'That is all right; I will take that.' When he was showed cheap chairs, he said, 'I will take them.' When Hatfield showed him other pieces of furniture, he said promptly, 'I will take them.' Then he said he wanted a cheap trunk, the largest in the store. They went to the trunk department and they picked out a packing trunk of the largest size. He said he wanted a common valise and a strap for the trunk.

These articles were all produced and he went away. That must have been before the signing of the lease for the flat, because he comes back the next day and tells them to deliver the goods. He picked out the commonest furniture, stating that it was only for temporary use. The next day he went back and paid for the furniture and it was moved to 176 Clark street.

"Now, gentlemen, have you any doubt about that furniture going to that number? None of you can have a doubt on that question. When he went back to Revell's he said he wanted a larger sized strap; that the strap he got was too small, too light, and Mr. Hatfield said he would get him a larger strap, which he did and charged him 50 cents for it. Mr. Allen, who moved the furniture, said he took a bed; a bureau, a washstand, a mattress, a bowl, and pitcher, the trunk (the valise and strap were inside the trunk) and all the articles that this man Simonds had purchased, to 117 South Clark street. The shipping clerk Neahr, who packed the goods testified that the goods taken over there were the same as those bought by Simonds. This was followed by the evidence of McHale, the carpet layer, who said he laid the carpet in the front room of 117 Clark street; that Simonds appeared there and was very easy about the matter, not caring just how the carpet was laid, and he had the carpet laid in the front room. It is not for us to say what the objecting was in renting the flat at 117 Clark street; it is true that that number was selected; it is true that this furniture was purchased; it is true that the trunk was purchased and went with this furniture. Now we find that the only living person identified as occupying the room, in which this furniture was placed and the carpet laid, is the man Kunze. He was seen there with another man taller than himself. They were seen there frequently during the time the flat was occupied by this man Simonds, and Kunze was the man who was identified as being in that flat at the time. That is testified to by James, testified here in a manner that must convince you that he was telling the truth, because, in his evidence, he was not over-anxious about anything else. When the learned counsel for the defense asked him if he had ever been mistaken about men he had seen on the street, James said he might have been, that such a thing could happen, but he was not mistaken as to Kunze being the man who was in the flat. That evidence was before you, and that is the first time Kunze appears in this case, with the exception, perhaps, of his trip with Coughlin down to Peoria, which was in relation to another matter, and was only shown for the purpose of letting the jury know the intimacy that existed between Coughlin, the chairman of the committee and this man who was seen in the flat. He is just the kind of character, just the kind of man that Daniel Coughlin would have selected to occupy that room.

"This flat is occupied. We have shown that the furniture was moved in there, that the trunk was moved in, that the valise and all the articles purchased at Revell's were moved into that flat, and stayed there until the night of the 20th. You will remember that Collector Goldman, who collects the rents for this real estate firm, went to collect the rent for the flats on the morning of the 20th of March. He didn't find any one in, but he peeped through the letter hole and saw the carpet and furniture still there and went away. But when he returned the next morning, the 21st of March, the flat was vacant. And if you remember the other evidence, you will find that they moved in the evening. Now, why was that flat rented? Why was this furniture purchased? Is there any explanation on earth except that it was purchased and moved in for the very purpose for which it was used thereafter? Why they selected that flat at 117 South Clark street is not for us to answer. Why they should have moved the furniture in there first is problematic, except it was for the purpose of losing the ident.i.ty 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 const.i.tution that gave him power to inflict a penalty. They had already, then, pa.s.sed 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 const.i.tution that required him, or that gave him power to inflict a penalty on the senior guardian for having read the report of the trial committee in his camp. This was not written in all seriousness; it was written as a covering for what had happened in Camp 20.

RENTING THE CARLSON COTTAGE.

"This was on the 16th. On the 17th comes back this letter from Spelman. On the 18th Beggs writes this other letter, in which he says the time is coming when the men who are creating disturbances in the Irish organization will find there is a day of punishment.

He had it on his mind he had been conferring with this committee.

On the 18th Mr. Simonds was talking of renting the flat, and when Beggs wrote this letter in reply to Spelman, stating that the time is coming when those men who are creating this disturbance would learn there is a day of punishment, then it was they began active operations. On the 19th the furniture was purchased and placed in the flat, so there is no other theory on earth than that it was the work of this committee, whoever they may be. Well, it does not stop there. On the 20th of March we find that a man by the name of Frank Williams appears on the scene. He introduces himself on the afternoon of the 20th, and I was somewhat surprised that my brother Donahoe spent a whole half-day trying to show that P. O'Sullivan was an hour's ride from home at noon that day. This all occurred on the afternoon of the 20th, and the object of that proof was to show that this man, Martin Burke, alias Williams, alias Cooper and Delaney, didn't walk over the plot and talk to P. O'Sullivan after he rented the cottage. It was to show that P. O'Sullivan was not at home about that time on the 20th, and I was somewhat surprised that the learned counsel wasted time on it. Charles Carlson said it was in the afternoon when this man Williams came to rent the cottage.

He knew positively that it was after one o'clock, but the exact time he could not state. That is not disputed by any one. So it is no use quibbling over that alibi; there is nothing of an alibi about it. It is all as plain as it can be that the renting took place on the afternoon of the 20th. But, anyway, this man, Frank Williams, who is loaded down with names, comes and rents the cottage. The testimony of Jonas Carlson shows that he had a sign 'For Rent' on his cottage; and you must remember that it is just 102 feet from the steps of O'Sullivan's house to the entrance of Mr. Carlson's back gate, and it is only 166 feet to the corner of the front cottage, in which this murder was committed.