"I have gone over the salient features of the evidence, and I say unhesitatingly that there is evidence which points directly to Coughlin; it points directly to Patrick O'Sullivan, and it points directly to Burke, unerringly to those three as having a direct connection with the murder of Dr. Cronin. Are those isolated men, scattered over the city, having no bond of harmony? On the contrary, the evidence is that four of those men on trial were bound together by a bond. Judge Wing said the murder in this case was different from an ordinary case. He said truly. The motive was not robbery; it was not personal hate, but it was hatred, political hatred in its nature, growing out of a political conspiracy. That conspiracy originated in Camp 20, and it is in evidence that Beggs, Coughlin, O'Sullivan and Burke are members of that camp. There you have the start of it. In the course of circ.u.mstances, Sullivan made the contract which was to lure the doctor to destruction; Coughlin told the chief of police and told Thomas O'Connor that his enmity toward Cronin grew out of secret society matter and was of long standing. Simonds buys the furniture, Burke hires the house--the Carlson Cottage--and the full arrangements are made for the butchery of their victim. It is also in evidence that Coughlin wanted Sampson to slug the Doctor, and up to that time he had not got to the pitch when he wanted him killed, but you will see how it grew. The evidence shows he denounced him as a spy, and on the Monday morning after the murder, when he admitted his enmity to the Doctor, the Doctor's body was lying in the catch-basin.

"How about Patrick O'Sullivan? We find after the murder he goes to see Mrs. O'Farrer, and she says to him it is an awful murder. He replied 'Yes.' She then asked why did they kill him. Now, mark his reply. He says: 'They say he was a spy and gave away the secrets of the order to which he belonged, and if he did he should be killed.'

Here you have the conspirators of Camp 20 at work.

"Where did the trouble begin? Recollect that O'Sullivan says to Mrs. O'Farrer when he was at her house that, 'They say Cronin gave away the secrets of the order to which he belonged.' It is in evidence in this case that the only secrets that Cronin ever gave away were about embezzlement of the money and the sending of their brethren to English prisons. You know also that it is in evidence in this case that the very first hostility toward Cronin was made apparent in Camp 20 of the Clan-na-Gael organization. There was constant turmoil and trouble in the Clan-na-Gael organization because of the embezzlements and the wrong doing of the triangle.

It is in evidence also that Dr. Cronin charged at the trial of that triangle that they had embezzled over $100,000 of the funds of the organization besides sending patriotic Irishmen into British prisons. Whether that be true or false we have not been permitted to show. So far as this case is concerned it is immaterial whether true or false. You are an American jury; this is an American court; these defendants are here under indictment, and you are called upon to administer American law; and whether Dr. Cronin may have been a spy or an honest man and a patriot cuts no figure whatever in this case. One thing, however, I can say. When that sewer gave up its dead, it opened up the sunlight of heaven on these charges. 'Cronin was killed,' says O'Sullivan: 'he was killed because he gave away the secrets of his order,' and I repeat the only secrets he could have given away were the embezzlement of the funds and the imprisonment of their brothers. His mouth was closed and his charges were forever stopped by his death. That swollen and distorted body, those mute lips, prove the truth of his charges more clearly than any court or jury could possibly do, and if these charges were not true there would have been no motive for them to put him out of the way. Thomas O'Connor tells you he was present at a meeting of Camp 20 when a man, Foy, arose, and said they had better look out for spies, and there were other Le Carons among them. He says that he made a speech to that effect, I may not give you the exact details, and O'Connor said in reply that they had better look out for the men who were embezzling the funds of the organization and sending their brothers to English prisons. A storm arose. The records of that meeting show three things: They show, first, a resolution to the effect that hereafter no member should be initiated whose name had not been submitted to all the camps.

They show, secondly, that a demand was proposed to be made on the executive for information in regard to the Buffalo trial, that is the trial of the triangle; and thirdly, that that was amended or changed so as to read that information should be asked from the district member.

"That record also shows the appointment, or pa.s.sage of a resolution for the appointment of a secret committee of three by the senior guardian to investigate rumors afloat regarding the trial committee. What were they? O'Connor has told you that the charges were what he made, and he and others say that the camp where these charges were made was known as Dr. Cronin's camp. Denis O'Connor and others say they knew to whom Thomas O'Connor referred. To investigate the matter of these rumors then meant to investigate the men who put these rumors afloat. That man was killed, foully slain, and his body thrown into the sewer. Now Beggs wrote to the district member. Beggs asked the district member to investigate certain charges. The first resolution of the meeting required him to do that. The district member said he knew of no portion of the const.i.tution which was violated by an act of that kind, and he knew of no section of the const.i.tution which would enable him to inflict a penalty. That letter of Beggs' when you study it, means this: 'I do not want to do this, I would rather have nothing to do with it, but I have been compelled to notice it, and these old quarrels must stop.' And you will notice it is full of forebodings of dangers to come.

"Again, subsequently, you will remember that Beggs replied at a subsequent meeting that the committee--the secret committee which he had appointed--must report to him alone. Then the practical part of the business began with the appointment of that committee. It was Beggs' duty to appoint that committee. Beggs did appoint that committee. Beggs was an enemy of Cronin, as were the others. Beggs denounced him as did the others. Beggs said after his death, 'O, he will turn up; he is all right.' The others said the same thing.

They covered his body with the filth of the sewer and his memory with the epithet of traitor. I said in an American court, before an American jury, it made no difference whether the charges which Coughlin made were true or false, it made no difference whether he was a traitor or a patriot, but the truth of history demands that the name of Cronin shall be vindicated, and it is vindicated more strongly than it could be by mortal lips when you remember that that vindication comes from the slime of the sewer on his body and the production of his clothes, also from another sewer. They murdered him because they feared his charges; they called him a spy in order to nerve their dupes to kill him, and they slew him.

Gentlemen of the jury, I have now said all in this case that I intend to say. It is needless for me to say more, as I shall be followed by others of great ability. I simply ask you to do this.

Your duty is unpleasant, and the duties you have already undergone have been onerous and burdensome.

"It is unpleasant for a man to sit on the trial of a fellow-man on a charge involving his life and liberty, but it is your business to do that in this case. As long as human nature is const.i.tuted in such a way as it is, law will be necessary to make some men walk straight. Crimes, murders, thefts and arsons can only be prevented by the enforcement of the law. The law, as I said, can only be enforced by the jury. On the call of Providence you are here now, and your duty is before you. Recollect, gentlemen, that while your duty is serious and burdensome, it is also of vast importance.

Remember, gentlemen, that your duty is just as important and as necessary, and the necessity for courage and determination to carry out that duty is as great as it would be upon the battlefield or in any other walk of life. Deal with these men justly, execute the law, satisfy your own consciences, and the rest of us will be satisfied."

COUNSELOR DONAHOE TALKS.

Mr. Ingham was followed by Mr. Donahoe, who spoke in behalf of O'Sullivan and Kunze. He prefaced his argument with the remark that there was no duty in the life of a lawyer that afforded him more pleasure than to defend the innocent; and that, therefore, he began to plead for the lives of his two clients with a heart as light as that of a newly-made bride, caressed with her husband's love. It was the apparent desire of the public prosecutor to disgrace every witness, who appeared to testify to any fact or circ.u.mstance, tending to show the innocence of the accused, but this course would never deter him from exercising the best ability that G.o.d had given him, in procuring for his clients every legal right known to the law and the country. He urged the jury to banish all prejudice, and to adopt reasonable judgment in considering the legal evidence of the case and the laws of the country, and urged that if they did so, his two clients would soon be breathing the free air of heaven.

The counsel drew attention to the fact, that he had been especially a.s.signed to the defense of Kunze by the Court, the prisoner having sworn that he did not have a dollar, and also said that until the opening of the present case he had had no connection with O'Sullivan or any of his friends. There was nothing to prove, the counsel went on to argue, that Kunze was in any way connected with the crime. The young man who claimed to have seen him wash his feet at the window of the Clark street flat, as well as the saloon-keeper, whose place he was alleged to have visited on the night of May the 4th, might easily have been mistaken. It was, in brief, a case of mistaken ident.i.ty. Mr. Donahoe argued at length, with a view of showing that the testimony regarding the identification was at all times questionable, and should be received with a great degree of caution, and quoted numerous authorities to ill.u.s.trate the fact that his theory was correct.

Proof of criminal intent, he said, was absolutely necessary, and that that was proof absolutely lacking. Mr. Donahoe concluded his speech in these words:

"Gentlemen, I am about to say the last words for my clients. Their welfare is in your hands. I am satisfied that if you banish from your mind everything but the law and the evidence, in this case, you will unlock the prison door and let them go about their business, earning their bread by the sweat of their brows.

Something was said in this case, some discussion in your presence about Alexander Sullivan. There is no proof that my clients know Alexander Sullivan. If there should exist in your minds, or if there has been injected into your minds, prejudice against that man, for G.o.d's sake don't use that against my clients, two young men whom the evidence in this case proves to be innocent. Yet the law does not say that they require to show their innocence; the law requires that the prosecution shall show their guilt. I have at heart the welfare of Kunze, although he never gave me a dollar, as much as I have the welfare of my client, O'Sullivan, who has retained me in this case. Banish all prejudice and suspicion from your minds; apply your reason and judgment and consciences to the law and the evidence in this case, and I am sure, then, that these young men will be acquitted, as they ought to be. Remember that in your hands rests the lives of these men. Remember that one day you will be called upon to give an account for every act and deed done in this life. Let nothing that you shall do in this case against my clients be such as shall be charged against you when you appear before that tribunal of the Most High, and when you are asked 'How have you dealt with your fellow-men?' don't have to say that when dealing with your fellows you had b.l.o.o.d.y hearts. Merciful! The more merciful a man is, the more G.o.dlike he is! But, gentlemen of the jury, do not misunderstand me. Do not think that I am asking for mercy for my clients. Oh, no; not at all; not at all. I ask that you carefully weigh this evidence, consider the law, be governed by the legal evidence and the law, and that is all that I ask you to do. I believe that if you banish everything from your minds but the law and the evidence in this case, that the G.o.d that gave you a head to think and a heart to feel for your fellow-men, the G.o.d that gave you an existence, will never permit you to strangle my clients. Oh, no, unless you are ready to guess them into eternity, you can't convict them on this proof. I tried this case fairly. I have treated every witness fairly, I have been respectful to the Court, and I have been respectful to you. These two young men's welfare, their lives, are confided to your hands. For G.o.d's sake, for their sake, for your sake, make no mistake. Gentlemen, I thank you."

HYNES' GREAT EFFORT.

The announcement that Mr. W. J. Hynes would commence his argument at the opening of court, upon the day following the conclusion of Mr. Donahoe's address, had the effect of attracting an immense throng to the Temple of Justice. Hundreds were admitted, while thousands were unable to gain entrance to the court-room. Judge McConnell took his seat on the bench at ten o'clock, and Mr. Hynes immediately commenced his address. He said that in what he had to say he would endeavor to be fair. He knew the importance of the great proceeding of the character under consideration. He knew that, no matter how guilty men might be, under the civilization of a century, punishment was to be visited only under due process of law. For three months or more the public time had been occupied in hearing the accusations, trying the accused, considering the evidence, listening to the arguments, through that protection of the law for which lives have been sacrificed and rivers of blood have been spilled, to secure to those charged with crime the protection of the law. That protection of the law had been thrown around the men on trial to see that they should have a fair hearing, and that the jury should render a fair verdict. All evidence that was not competent had been excluded, and, wherever a question of doubt had arisen, His Honor, the judge, exercising his natural instincts of mercy, had solved that doubt for the benefit of the accused. Hearsay evidence had been excluded; the defendants had been confronted by the witnesses who testified against them, and all these forms of law, of civilization and justice had been extended in the trial of men accused of charging a man behind his back, of killing him behind his back, of killing him first and accusing him afterward. Even such men as these, however, were ent.i.tled to all the protection of courts of law, and to all the safeguards which the law threw around them, because no human life could be taken, no human liberty or freedom could be abridged by a day or an hour, until the court of justice, the accusation against the accused had been judicially ascertained and determined by twelve fair-minded men beyond a reasonable doubt.

[Ill.u.s.tration: W. J. HYNES. ONE OF COUNSEL FOR PROSECUTION.]

With this introduction, the learned counsel proceeded to review the case from the day of the disappearance of Dr. Cronin. He declared that the dispatches received at Chicago, from Canada, shortly after the disappearance of the physician, and to the effect that he was alive and in the flesh in the dominion, demonstrated beyond a doubt that the defense was organized before the crime was committed. It demonstrated, moreover, the existence of a wide-spread conspiracy, the conspiracy of intelligence and brains, as well as of experience in handling the telegraph and the press. John F. Beggs had said that Cronin was not dead and would turn up all right, and if the scheme of disposing of Dr. Cronin's body on the night of May 4th had not been frought with some misadventure, some miscarriage of judgment, the public, not understanding the motive which underlied the occasion, would probably have believed that what Beggs said was correct. If all the marks of the crime had been obliterated, if the body had not been found, if it had been disposed of, the murderers, and those behind the murderers would have continued to charge that Dr. Patrick H. Cronin was a British spy, and that his disappearance was to be accounted for upon the hypothesis that he had gone to England to testify against Parnell. This would have been the claim.

It was to confirm the impression made upon the minds of some of the "dupes" of the triangle, that the disappearance, as well as all traces of the crime were to be wiped out, so that the story would be accepted that Cronin was a spy, and a traitor to the cause to which he had always allied himself and which he had sworn to defend, and that he had violated his oath and crossed the broad Atlantic in order to testify against his own country and in behalf of England.

The speaker proceeded to dissect the evidence at length. He paid particular attention to the testimony of the medical witnesses for the State, urging that it was ent.i.tled to full credence, and that the prosecution received all the aid of science that was possible.

Continuing, Mr. Hynes said:

THE DEFENSE OF THE PRISONERS.

"Now what sort of a defense--because I propose to deal with that first--what kind of a defense is made by these five prisoners? A defense that is not a defense is worse than no defense at all. A defense that utterly fails, as this defense in my judgment has utterly failed, leaves the case of the prisoners stronger against them than it was when the State rested. You expect some defense when an accusation of this kind is brought against men. You are looking for explanations. You are hoping, like merciful men, that every circ.u.mstance and every word will find an explanation consistent with innocence, and when the defense fails to meet the accusation and to furnish an explanation, then it is disastrous to the defendants. The only defense that is set up here is the common defense that is set up for the commonest criminal--the favorite defense of an alibi. I am not here to abuse all the witnesses that appeared to prove alibis for these defendants. I remember that on the evening of the 4th of May Mrs. Whalen and Miss McCormick say they went out of the house and were out until after 10 o'clock. I do know that Miss McCormick said they went out about the time the boys were getting ready to go away to the saloon. These boys that went to the saloon fix the hour of supper all the way from 7 to half-past 8 o'clock, fluctuating between 7 and half-past 8 o'clock; that is the value of an alibi. In fixing the time, the human mind does not go back, unless there is something special about it--unless there is something at the time of the act to a.s.sociate the time with the act. That makes them a part of each other and relating to each other at the time of the act; not by mere recollection afterward.

"All these witnesses testify that Patrick O'Sullivan got home on the evening of the 4th of May between half-past 5 and 6 o'clock. We had the statement of Mr. O'Sullivan himself, made to Captain Schaack--and he ought to know better than they--that he got home at half-past 7 o'clock, a difference of an hour and a half or nearly two hours in Patrick O'Sullivan's own statement when he talked with Captain Schaack. He said he arrived home at half-past 7, and that he was not out of his house that evening after he got home. They all say he got home about half-past 5 or 6 o'clock--every witness here. Who knows best, and what is the value of recollection as to the hour when the thing occurred? They all, with the exception of Mulcahey, swear that he was not out of his house after that time--after supper; that he sat down for a time in the house and then went to bed with Mulcahey. He, himself, feeling that he had been seen out of the house that night, at least back in the alley near the Carlson cottage, sent for Captain Schaack while he was still a prisoner in the jail, and said he wanted to make a correction of his former statement. He was out of the house that night, he said, but only out to the alley in the rear of his barn."

"That is not the testimony," said Mr. Donahoe.

"That is the testimony," insisted Mr. Hynes, "and I will refer to it."

"No," rejoined Mr. Donahoe, "he said he went to the rear of the barn. I have got the testimony here."

O'SULLIVAN'S CONTRADICTORY STATEMENTS.

"I have got the testimony, too," said Mr. Hynes, "and I will read it. He said he went to the rear of the shed in the alley. Let me call your attention also to the fact that Mulcahey, his room-mate, does admit that he was out of the house that night about 8 o'clock or half-past 8--out in the yard. Mulcahey fixes the supper at about half-past 7 o'clock; so that he has him out in the yard about 8 or half-past 8 that night, and not another soul in the house knew he was out of the house. All of them swore that he did not leave the house. Do I say that they perjured themselves? No; not all of them."

"Do I understand you to say," interrupted Mr. Donahoe, "that Mulcahey swore he was out of the house?"

"Mulcahey swears," replied Mr. Hynes, "that he was out at 8 or half-past 8 in the yard."

"He did not swear to it in this court," said Mr. Donahoe.

"He swore to it in this court," retorted Mr. Hynes, "and I will read you his testimony. It is perfectly proper, gentlemen,"

continued Mr. Hynes, addressing the jury, "for Mr. Donahoe to challenge my statements. I invite him to do it--first, to correct myself if I am in error, and, secondly, to show that I am right if I make a statement of that kind. Here is Captain Schaack's statement. Captain Schaack says: 'There is one thing I forgot; in conversation with O'Sullivan I asked him where he was on the 4th of May. He said he was on the ice wagon all day. I asked him what time he came home in the evening, and he said 7 or 7:30. He had his supper and went to bed about 8 or 8:30, and about 9:30 some men came home, and he got up and let them in and went to bed again. I asked him if he was positive that he was not away from his house, and he said he was positive he was not; that he was in the house all the evening. After he was in the jail he sent for me and I came down to see him in the jail. He told me he had forgot to tell me he was out of the house that night in the rear of the shed.'"

Here Mr. Donahoe objected, saying that nothing was said about O'Sullivan's being in the alley. Mr. Hynes said that if he was beyond the shed he was of necessity in the alley. A short dispute followed, in which some testimony was read, which was finally won by Mr. Hynes, who then continued:

"There is no more point about his being on one side of the shed than on the other; the point lies in the value of the alibi. They put young Knight on the stand and there is nothing that better ill.u.s.trates the value of an alibi than his testimony. They put on Menahan and they both swore that the two Hylands came there on Sunday afternoon about 5 o'clock. Knight swears that O'Sullivan was in the house from a point of time between 4 and 5 o'clock on the afternoon of Sunday, May 5, and that when the Hylands came in he shook hands with them, and he was not out of the house from that time until he went out at 10 o'clock that night, when it is conceded that O'Sullivan was down at Mrs. Conklin's at that time, and did not get home until half-past 7 or 8. And yet they could put Knight on the stand--honestly swearing, because there was no proof that he was swearing falsely--honestly swearing and insisting, under Judge Longenecker's cross-examination, that O'Sullivan was not out of the house from 4 or 5 o'clock until 10 o'clock that Sunday night. But everybody knows he was out. He was with Detective Murray down at Mrs. Conklin's. Everybody concedes that he did not get home until half-past 7 or 8 o'clock.

WORTHLESSNESS OF THE ALIBI.

"Now, there is the value of an alibi. Knight says that the two Hylands got there between 4 and 5 o'clock on Sunday afternoon, and were in the house and did not leave until about 10 o'clock. The tall Hyland said nothing about their leaving O'Sullivan's house in the afternoon. Recess came, and I wondered where the memories were put together, and the fact was recalled that it had already appeared in the evidence that O'Sullivan was down at the Conklin's house at those hours. When the Smaller Hyland went on the stand in the afternoon he said they went there between 4 and 5 o'clock. He said O'Sullivan was not at home and they went off to a ball game and did not return until about 7:30 in the evening. Others of O'Sullivan's household testified to the same state of facts. Knight swears that the Hylands never left the house that Sunday afternoon--that they were there all those hours and he was in the parlor talking to them. Menahan swears that the Hylands came there about 5 o'clock, and that he did not believe he was out of the house except a few minutes when he was only around the yard. Every time he went back to the house the Hylands were there, and he said he knew they did not leave the house except to step out of the door for a moment. But were they at O'Sullivan's that afternoon? There is the value of their alibi. Would not the alibi for the Hylands be just as good as their alibi for Sat.u.r.day night? Would not their alibi for that Sunday afternoon when O'Sullivan was down at Mr.

Conklin's with Detective Murray, be just as good as the alibi for Sat.u.r.day night? An alibi defense! But there is nothing tells better upon the alibi than O'Sullivan's own testimony. Those people swear he was home, covering the time when old man Carlson testified that voices were heard in the Carlson cottage at 7 o'clock. Mr. Carlson said he saw Martin Burke come out of the door at 5 o'clock on Sat.u.r.day afternoon and spoke to him, and Burke said: 'I guess it is not too early to fix up,' and old Jonas said: 'I guess not.' Burke went in, and he came out again at 7 o'clock, and old man Carlson heard the voices of some men inside the cottage. And it was old Jonas who testified that Patrick O'Sullivan admitted to Captain Schaack that he got home about 7 or half-past 7 o'clock that evening. He did not get home before that, and he (O'Sullivan) took his supper and went to bed.

"Now the others swear that he was home from half-past 5 or before 6 o'clock up to supper time, and was not out of the house once, except, as stated by Mulcahey, when he went into the yard at half-past 7 or 8 o'clock. O'Sullivan says himself he was out. I don't care whether you put it as far as the shed, or the rear of the shed, as Captain Schaack put it in his direct examination. The fact that he was out and away from the house shows the value of the alibi! I don't claim that O'Sullivan was in the house when Dr.

Cronin entered. If he was he was not immediately in view, because the word sent to the doctor was that O'Sullivan was out of town, and his card was presented, on which the Doctor would go and attend to the business; it would not answer the purpose that O'Sullivan should appear in the room the moment the Doctor entered. At least he was not in the immediate view of the Doctor when he entered the room, because his presence would have excited the Doctor's suspicion. The Doctor certainly did not see him in that room, if he was there, until after the door was closed behind him and after the first blow was struck that Mrs. h.o.e.rtel heard.

THE VALUE OF HUMAN MEMORY.

"Now, gentlemen, such is the value of human memory. These witnesses said they were there up to O'Sullivan's time of departure, and he was at home at supper. You see their anxiety to be able to account for O'Sullivan's whereabouts, and to be able to fix the time that would answer his purpose. When Tom Whalen was put on the stand I think I cross-examined him myself as to the hour in which he was in the habit of getting home. 'Oh,' he said, 'at various hours,' but it was finally narrowed down to the fact that he got home about 6:30. He had to go about a mile and a half to his home, and he said that he generally got there about 7. Then as soon as he saw that I was endeavoring to pin him down to an earlier hour, taking the hour he quitted work as a gauger, he said he would sometimes loaf around the barn and talk ten or fifteen minutes with the men. He said also that they generally waited supper for him after he got home. That shows that supper was late. It appeared that the ladies went out after supper. They say they went out on their own suggestion.

Probably they did. They were absent. I am glad they were absent, but if they had not been they probably would have said they had seen O'Sullivan that evening. O'Sullivan would say to them, 'Don't you remember that I was here?' and they would not deny it, but would believe it, and in their anxiety to help and save him they would believe it surely and swear to it. That is all I wish to say about those ladies. It was necessary to get supper late. Mrs.

h.o.e.rtel had seen a man standing between the two houses inside the fence about 8 o'clock--probably five or ten minutes past 8 o'clock.

She saw a man standing between the Carlson cottage and the little cottage in which the Carlsons lived. He was standing on the sidewalk inside the fence--in other words, close to the back door of the Carlson cottage; when she got on Roscoe street she saw the man there. The question arises, was not that Patrick O'Sullivan?

and so supper is belated, and we have an attempt to show that he was not out of the house. Mulcahey says that he was out of the yard between 8 and 8:30 o'clock. I don't know anything about Mulcahey's conduct or whereabouts that evening except what he told us. He was O'Sullivan's bed-fellow, and his bed-fellow from the first night that he arrived from those regions in Pennsylvania that have become celebrated for crimes of this nature."

"I object and except to those remarks," cried Mr. Donahoe, angrily.

"You know the Molly Maguires in Pennsylvania," continued Mr. Hynes, "down in that notorious valley."