The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1889-10-27
CRONIN CASE EVIDENCE.
The DEFENSE WANTS TO BAR
OUT NEWSPAPER READERS.

The Point Raised When a Physician
Was Put on the Stand Who Had
Read the Testimony of a Brother
Practitioner Previously CaIled-The
Judge Declares It Impracticable.
CHICAGO, Oct. 26. The Cronin trial was
resumed at the usual hour this morning.
The first witness was County Physician
Todd. He testified that only DR.. Egbert,
his assistant, and himself had the combina-
ton to the vault in which the plate with
the false teeth taken from DIR. Cronin's
mouth was ept He Todd had not entered
the vault since DIR. Cronin's death.
DR.. D. g. Moore, who was present at the
autopsy, was called and described the
wounds and marks of Identification on tho
body.
OBJECTION TO THE TESTIMONY.
After DR.. Morehead testified at great
length and minuteness as to the wounds on
DR. Cronin's body, the defense moved to
exclude his testimony on thu ground
of the trial made by the Associated
Press in this mornings papers, which
gave the entire testimony of Dr.
Egbert They argued that the physician
read this, knowing that he was to testify,
and that an order of the court excluded
witnesses while testimony was being taken,
yet the reading of testimony had precisely
the same effect as the hearing Of it,
THE JUDGE OF THE SAME MIND.
Judge Mcconnell said he thought the
evidence should be excluded, when there
was storm of objections from the prose
cutlon and clamors to be heard. Messrs
Hines and Mills protested against such a
ruling, and said they could not produce a
witness who had not read all about this
case, and the judge might just as well adj
journ the case now if he was going to hold
TO any such doctrine.
THE RULE IMPRACTICABLE.
After considering argument on both
sides the Judge ruled as follows: "The rule
of exclusion evidently is for the purpose of
preventing witnesses who are excluded
from knowing what a witness on the stand
said, either for the purpose of affirming OF
contradicting their testimony. But that
rule was probably conceived at time when
most of the rules pertaining to the jury
were conceived before the news
papers took such pains to pub
lish all the proceedings; and L
can easily see that if l should enforce the
rule in its old spirit, criminal trials and
great many civil cases could not be pro-
ceeded with; it would be impossible. That
rule was wise in its time, and may beAwise to
some extent yet, but it cannot be possible
to make it operate to prevent witnesses
from testifying to offenses against the state
or testifying to matters of defense. do
not believe that can enforce
the rule. If it were possible for me
to ask the proprietors of newspapers
not to publish these accounts, | should un-
questiouably do so; but, of course, no such
request would be respected. In this day Of
wide newspaper circulation and verbatim
reports, do not see that the court can do
more than TO simply exclude witnesses
from the room, and say that the court ap-
preciates that that does not amount to
anything at all.
The motion was consequently overruled, i,
and the Doctors testimony stands.
THE LIvERYMAN ON THE STAND.
The next witness was Patrick Dinan, q
hvery stable keeper He testified to the
facts in regard 10 the hiring of horse and
buggy from him by Dan Coughlin.
one of the prisoners, on the day
that DR.. Cronin was murdered substantially
as they have heretofore been published.
After long and severe cross-examination
Of Dinan by Mr.. Forrest of the counsel for
the defense, in which the witness was not
at all confused, the court adjourned until
Monday morning.