Los Angeles daily herald. [microfilm reel] (Los Angeles [Calif.]) 1884-1890, 1889-12-14
GONE TO THE JURY.
UVNH 10 lHN JUhI.
Closing Scenes in the Great
Cronin Trial.
THK STATE RESTS THE CASE.
Longenecker's Concluding Argu-
Inent - Judge MeC0nnell's
Charge to the Jury.
THE STATE RESTS THE CASE

| CHICAGO, December 13.--On accoun
OF the illness of Mills, States Attorne
Longenecker was obliged to make th
CLOSING address to the jury in the Cronil
case. He began by repelling the charg
of the defense that the Cronin section
of the Clan-na- Gael had suborned a larg
amount Of perjured testimony agains
the accused. He said most of the Clan
na-Gael evidence was by members of tn,
triangle" camps. He then took up an,
dwelt at length on the evidence agains
Beggs.
On reassembling court in the after
noon Judge Longenecker continued hi,
reply to Forests argument, and Their
made rapid running sketch of the evil
dence OF the leading witnesses and the
circumstances under which it was given,
by way OF reply to Forests charge thai
there was conspiracy to convict the de.
teddants: Remember that we are here
insisting that this evidence is 80 over
whelmiDg that you, as honest men under
your oaths, cannot resist this volume Of
proof that must convince you, as sensible
men, beyond reasonable doubt, that all
i've Of these men are guilty of this
crime"
THE CHARGE TO THE JURY.
| Judge Mcconnell then delivered his
charge to the jury, saying in part: 1.-THE
manner or cause of death which 10
alleged in the indictment is an essential
element of the charge against the defend.
| ants, and the law requires the prosecu.
| ton to establish that averment to your
| satisfaction beyond reasonable doubt.
az it is laid in the indictment, before
conviction can lawfully be had. But
| whether or not the murder or cause of
| death was as laid in the Indictment, NAV
be established by circumstantial evidence
just as any other fact essential to
conviction may be. Circumstantial eyi.
dencs in criminal cases is proof of such
facts and circumstances connected with,
or surrounding, the commission of the
crime charged, as tend to show the
guilt or innocence of the party charged /;
and il these facts and circumstances are
sufficient to satisfy the jury of the guilt
of the defendants beyond reasonable
doubt, then such evidence is sufficient to
authorize the jury in finding the de-
PENDANTS guilty.
SIT il the duty of the jury to enter
upon the consideration of each circum-
stance proven, having in their minds the
presumption that the defendants, and
each of them, are innocent; and If such
fact or circum stance, when considered
in connection with all the evidence in
the case, can be explained consistently
with the innocence of the accused, it is
their duty 30 to explain it. In order to
justify innocence OF legal guilt, from cir.
cumstantial evidence, the existence of
inculpatory facts must be absolutely in
compatible with the innocence of the &C.
cused, and incapable of explanation
upon any other reasonable hypothesis
than that Of their guilt.
"It is not sufficient for the iury to find
that resolution was adopted for the ap-
pointment of secret committee in
Camp 20, on February Sth, but it must
further appear to your satisfaction be-
yond all reasonable doubt that such
committee was in fact appointed by De.
fAndant Beggs, and that such appoint.
ment was in pursuance Or in furtherance
OF a conspiracy to commit the crime set out
in the Indictment, and you must further
be satisfied beyond all reasonable doubt
that Defendant Beggs had knowledge
of the purpose for which said committee
was asked, or If appointed, assented to
its purpose subsequently, or you will not
be justified in finding participation in
such conspiracy on the part of Defendant
Beggs by reason of the facts herein
stated.
THAT Defendant Beggs was member
of the United Brotherhood and presiding
officer of Camp 20, are not circumstances,
standing alone, tending to establish his
guilt of the crime charged in the indict-
ment, as there is no evidence in the case
that any overt act was committed by
Defendant Beggs in the commission of
the alleged murder charged in the in
dictment; therefore unless it is estab-
lished that conspiracy was entered into
to commit the murder charged in said in
dictment, to which conspiracy said Beggs
was party, he should be acquitted.
THE testimony Of verbal admissions,
statements and conversations ought to
be taken by you with great caution, be-
cause that sort of testimony is subject to
much impsrfection and mistake. Al
though you may believe Defendant
Beggs, at meeting OF Camp 20 on May
10Th, remarked in substance that the
committee was to report to him, and
even il you should further believe that
such remark contained some criminal i'm
port, yet in no view that can be taken of
his case will you be justified in using
such remark as evidence against any
other defendant.
"If you can reconcile the facts in this
case upon any reasonable theory con-
sistent with the innocence of Defendant
John Kunzs, it is your duty 30 to do, and
to find John Kunzs not guilty"
The same charge as this was made as
to each of the other defendants, except
Beggs, concerning whom the special in
structions above were given.
Continuing his charge the Judge said !:
although you may fully and con-
fdently believe that one ]. B. Simonds,
the person who drove DR.. Cronin away
from his home on the night Of May 4th,
and others unknown, were members of q
conspiracy to murder DIR. Cronin, as
charged in the Indictment, and indeed, that
they did murder him, yet you cannot,
and ought not, use any evidence respect
| ing the conduct and conversations OF
such persons, and any of them, against
any defendant unless you are first con-
WINGED, beyond every reasonable doubt,
by the evidence that such defendant was
also a member Of such conspiracy to
murder DIR. Cronin.
IF the jury believe from the evidence
beyond reasonable doubt that the de-
\