The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1889-10-30

i
| Counsel Tor the defense waived thier right to
! make an opening address to the jury, and the
taking OF testimony was begun. The first wit
| ness was ex-Capt. Francis Nilliers of the Lake
| view police. His testimony entirely I'M
| important, except as TO the one fact that he
knew DIR. Cronin in his lifetime and that as
| the body was being conveyed in police patrol
wagon from the catch-basin to the morgue, he
had identified il as that of the dead doctor.
p. W. Dunno, connected with the prOsecu-
ton in the Cronin trial. says efforts msking
to obtain from Parnell categorical statement
that Cr0nins name was not OF the four handed
in by the spy, lie Caron, those of the men
who were systematically betraying to the En-
glish government the secrets of the Irish move
ment in America.
CHICAGO, Oct 25.-The interesting de-
velopments in the Cronin case to-day
were mostly outside OF the courtroom.
From Winnipeg comes a story that while
in jail there Burke told to three fellow
prisoners the story of Cronin's murder.
! He said he was in the Carlson cottage and
saw the murder, but did not participate
in it, told who else were there, how the
body was disposed OF, who ordered the
execution and who furnished the money.
John Dewey writes a letter denouncing
Atty. Forrest for calling Dewey, McCahey
and Luke Dillon infOrmers. Dewey says
this is meant to incite their assassination,
and also meant to be warming that wit
nesses against the defendants testify at
the peril of their lives.
The trunk in which Dr. Cronin's body
was carried from the Carlson cottage at
tracted big crowds OF curiosity-seekers,
when taken to the states attorneys office
and securely locked up.
In the trial to-day a dozen witnesses
were put on to identity the body found in
the sewer as that OF DIR. Cronin. The
Identification was very perfect and posi-
tive. 1t embraced the hight, size and gen
eral appearance of the dead man, the
shape of his gOatee, the conformation of
his face, particularly his forehead; the
shape and size OF his teeth, the shape of
Once-broken finger, and the heavy growth
OF hair on the doctors wrists.
The next matter taken up was the find
ing of the body in the catch basin. The
two sewer-cleaners who discovered the
body and notified the police OF the fact,
and the policemen who were sent and
assisted in removing the body, were sworn
as to this point, and described the pro-
ceeding. Lawyer Forrest, for the defense,
made the cross-examination on this head
very searching and rigid, compelling the
witness to go over the proceedings in
connection with the removal of the body
with the utmost minuteness.
DIR. Egbert, who made the autopsy on
DIR. Cronin's body, described the wounds.
CrOss-eXamination of DR.. Egbert devel-
oped that none of the wounds on the
corpse were such as would necessarily
cause death. 1t was impossible also, the
doctor admitted, to say whetherthe wounds
were inflicted before or after death. He
had tried to ascertain, but was unable to
do so. He had not ascertained that the
wounds affected any important nerves or
arteries, and he could not swear that thev,
in any manner, affected the brain. If
death had resulted from the skull wounds,
it would, in all probability, have been
caused by conclusion OF the brain.
The usual post-mOTtem evidence Of
such result, the heart and
lungs being filled with blood,
was not found in this case. The question
was put to DIR. Egbert: rs it not true
that the dead body as examined by YOU
physicians-is it not scientifically true
that you physicians found no evidence in
that body that were certain and conclusive
OF the form OF death ?"
DIR. Egbert replied: ''Ihat is true"
"That is Gods truth, is IT'D"
Eyes, sir"
DR.. Egbert was of the opinion that death
had occurred through excessive loss of
blood, but there was no certainty OF it, he
said.
Dr. Perkins, who assisted at the post
norton, testified that in his opinion death
did not result from bood-etting, but
from conclusion of the brain. The latter
organ, however, was too decOmpOsed to
to afford any information.
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 combi-
nation to the vault in which the plate with
the false teeth taken from Dr. Cronin's
mouth was kept. He Or. Todd had not
entered the vault since DR.. Cronin's death.
Dr. d. c. Moore, who was present at the
autopsy, was called and described the
wounds and the marks of Identification OF
the body.
After DIR. Moore had testified at great
length and with great minuteness as to the
wounds on Dr. Cronin's body, the defense
moved to exclude his testimony on the
ground that he had read the verbatim re-
port of the trial made by the Associated
Press in this morning papers, which gave
the entire testimony of DR.. Egbert. They
argued that the physician read this, know
order of the court excluded witnesses
while testimony was being taken; yet the
reading of the testimony had precisely the
same effect as the hearing OF it.
Judge Mcconnell said he thought the
evidence should be excluded when there
was a storm of objections from the prose-
cuton and clamors to be heard. Messrs
Hynes and Mills protested against such a
ruling and said they could not produce a
witness who had not read all about this
case and that the Judge might just as well
adjourn the case now, if he was going to
hold to any such doctrine. After consid-
cradle argument on both sides, the judge
ruled as follows:
''The rule OF exclusion evidently is for
the purpose of preventing the witnesses
who are excluded from knowing what the
witnesses on the stand have said, either for
the purpose of affirming or contradicting
their testimony. But that rule was proba-
bly, conceived at the time when most of
the rules pertaining to the jury were con-
ceived-before the newspapers took such
pains TO publish all the proceedings-an
/ can easily see that if l should enforce
the rule in It's old spirit, criminal trials and
great many civil cases could not be pro-
ceeded with; it would be impos-
sible. That rule was wise in its time,
and may be wise to some extent
yet, but it cannot be pOssiblee
to make it operate to prevent witnesses
from testifying to offenses against the
state, or testifying to matters of defense.
/ / do mot boliax-a / CON apforoo 4ba rt,lo