Watertown republican. [volume] (Watertown, Wis.) 1860-1906, 1889-10-30


in the Cronin trial. this morning, hum
dreds of spectators were clamoring for
; admittance, and it required small
army of baiiiffs to.keep at bay the eager
ones who demanded to be passed in.
Promptly at 10 o'clock the 200 specta-
| tors permitted to assemble in Judge
| McConnells court were raped to or
| der. and as the defendants filed in and
| the attorneys took their seats, the clerk
called the roll of jurors. Every man re-
sponded to his name, and the Cron1n
i trial formally began.
States Attorney Longenecker at once
began his opening address to the jury.
He reviewed briefly the long continued
sitting of veniremen which had result
ed in the selection of the twelve before
| him. He then defined the duties of
| jurymen, explaining the meaning of
| presumption of innocence as applied in
the trial of persons charged with crime,
! telling the jury that presumption of
1 innocence was not matter to be
weighed against evidence. 1t was, he
said, mere negative which stood in the
/ way of conviction in the absence of evil
dence, but must not he allowed 10 weak
On the force of evidence given.
Mr.. Longenecker next took up and
| defined the meaning OF a reasonable
doubt as applied in such cases. On
this he said: when you stated that
you would not convict these men, ex-
cept they were proven guilty beyond
reasonable doubt, 1t simply meant this:
That If after hearing the evidence you
are satisfied as men of the truth of the
charge-if you are satisfied as jurymen
sworn to do your dutv-that the men On
| trial are guilty, then you have no right
! to GO looking around for doubts-you
| have no right to hunt around Tor an ex-
| cu>e to refrain from doing that which
the law makes it your duty to do. A
| reasonable doubt means doubt that is
| reasonable"
Mr.. Forrest, of counsel for the de-
! tense, interrupted the speaker at this
point, claiming that the definition of a
reasonable doubt has no place in an
opening address and should be used
only In the closing address. The Court
overruled the point and Mr.. Forrest
| noted an exception.
The States Attorney then proceeded
to define murder and to set forth what
| were the material allegations in the in
dictment which it would be- necessary
Tor the state to prove in order to Justify
a conviction. These were that Dr.. Gro
min was killed; that the killing was done
in this state; that it was done without
adequate provocation, and that
these defendants did it. The
speaker then defined direct and circum-
stantial evidence. He illustrated the
latter by saying that man might see
| another pointing pistol at a third per-
son; might see the flash, hear the re-
port and see the man drop; but, as he
could not see the bullet strike the man
fred at, it would be only circumstantial
evidence of the shooting.
The speaker then referred to the dis
appearance of DR.. Croain and the find
ing of his body eighteen days afterward,
and said that the state proposed to prove
1t murder as the result of conspir-
acy. He said: "These men are charged
with having murdered DR.. Cronin.
The evidence we shall introduce
will be to show conspiracy to
murder DR.. Cronin. The evidence
that we shall introduce will be that in
the conspiracy which was formed and
| carried into execution, terminating In
the killing of Or. Cronin. all the con-
spirators are liable for murder, and that
the punishment for conspiracy ends in
the punishment for murder. That is
the position we take in this case.
"Now as I say" Mr.. Loneenecker
continued, "on the night of the 4th of
May, at 7:3O O'Clock, nothing was seen or
heard of DR.. Cronin, except as we shall
prove that the same hidden hand that
worked and moved this conspiracy
that concocted this scheme-was again
working in this community to lead the
people to believe that DIR. Cronin was
still alive. That same hidden hand
| that same mysterious work upon
which the conspiracy rests in
this case-was at work trying
to make the people of this community
believe that DR.. Croniu was not MUIR
dered, but was still alive Not content
with having beat out his life-not con-
tent with having laid him to rest in
sewer - the same conspirators that
brought it about were again at work for
| the purpose of blasting the character and
reputation OF the man they had MUIR
dered. And until the 22d day of May the
people all over this country had doubts
as to whether the poor man was even
| killed"
| The States Attorney then proceeded
to speak of the motive for the crime
and said that in order to show what that
| motive was, it became necessary to ex-
| anime into the history in this country of
the organization known as the United
| Brotherhood, commonly called the
Clan-na-Gael. Before doing this he re-
minded the jury that they were not try
| ing the Clan-na-Gael but the prisoners
at the bar. Mr.. Lopgenecker then pro-
ceeded to sketch the history of the
Clan-na-G Gael in this country, saying that
it was made up of patriotic Irishmen,
Irishmen who went into it for political
effect, and irishmen who went into it for
the money there was in It--and that it's
| object was to free Ireland by force of
arms as soon as favorable opportunity
should offer. He declared that the tri-
angle was supreme; that the oaths of its
| members made their commands gu
perior to the laws of the nation.
Mr.. Forrest objected to this line of
statement as inadmissiDle in evidence of
proof, and Judge Mcconnell said that
he did not know What would
be proved, but warned the
states attorney that he was
making these statements at his peril.
The States Attorney said he would
prove what he had said and accept the
responsibility. He proceeded to
say that when Sullivan, Feeley
and Boland got control of the
| executive board they changed
tho r1au of work of the oroa nizafio and