Pittsburg dispatch. [volume] (Pittsburg [Pa.]) 1880-1923, 1889-12-03

ndO uOb DSoH proven, anu maue sbLOug
plea in Coughlin's behalf.
CHICAGO, December 2.-Mr Forrest, for
the defense, introduced some testimony in
rebuttal in the Cronin trial this morning
before the argument began. August Loe-
wenstein, clothier, testified that he sold to
Dan Coughlin, April q, the week before
the murder, pair of pants which Coughlin
then and there put on. In doing so he took
off the old pair which he wore and emptied
the pockets, placing the contents on a chair.
Among the articles were two knives.
Witness then examined the knives taken
from coughlin, and identified by Mr.. Conk-
lin as DR.. Cronin's, and said that he could
not say positively that they were the same
knives as those which he saw Coughliu
have on April 27, but they looked something
like them.
HE WANTED BOTH KNIVES.
On cross-examination the witness said
he just glanced at the knives and started to
take one of them, saying Coughlin did not
need both, but Coughlin stopped him, say
ing he wanted both of them. The examina-
tion brought out the fact that the witness is
q brother of ex-Deteetive Jake Loewenstein,
Dan Coughlin's partner. Ex-Detective
Loewenstein, Coughlin's partner, swore that
he recognized one of the knives as the one
Coughlin had carried for long time. The
other one he was pretty sure of, but not posi-
tive.
Judge Wing then began his review of the
evidence. After denouncing the evidence
of Saloonkeeper Nieman, Major Sampson
and Milkman Merles, the next point ham
died was that of the two knives supposed to
be Cronin's, found in Coughlin's possession.
On this point Judge Wing said:
JUDGE wING's PROPOSITIONS.
Now, that whole question is very easily dis
posed of by the statement of two propositions,
in which every mind on this Jury will agree
with me, think. First, the defendant here,
Coughlin. is either guilty or innocent. If inno-
cent, he could not have had those knives, if
they were Cronin'si if guilty. he would not
have had them if they belonged to DR.. Cronin.
Those two plain propositions, in the mind of
any reasoning man, would be the end of that
knife ePisode-the last and grand climax that
the State gave to case of suspicion against
these men. That they are not DR.. Cronin's is
conclusively shown by those two considera-
tions: That they were found 20 days after the
homicide, in the possession of Coughlin; that
if Cotghlin was Innocent. he could not have
".
he would not have had them. That is all there
is upon that episode. and that is all that can be
made of it by legitimate argument.
Yet, they say detective, member Of the
police force, a man who has sent the men that
had engaged the horse for carrying the man to
his death-Jhey would have this court and Jury
believe that man thus circumstanced would
carry two little knives which would indicate
his guilt beyond all earthly question, carry
them after he was arrested carry them after he
was suspected. say that if guilty he would
not have had them; if innocent he could not
have had them. He did have them and there
fore, they are not Cronin's knives.
THE CONSPIRACY QUESTION.
This, he said, was the only conclusion
which could be reached, even If no evidence
in rebuttal had been given, but two wit
nesses had testified that the knives were
Coughlin's. Judge Wing then took up the
question of the alleged conspiracy in Camp
20 and said:
Now there are only three ways under
heaven of establishing conspiracy in any par.
ticular case. One is by direct proof That can
rarely be made unless some man becomes dis
satisfied, or repentant, or something of the
kind, and reveals the conspiracy Another way
Is by circumstantial proof; by incidents and
facts and surrounding occurrences. Now,
here they have sought TO establish a conspiracy
in this case and they have got to acquit This
case can not be maintained in any court Of JUS
spiracy is established beyond all reasonable
donbt. These are two of the ways to establish
the conspiracy. and then there is the further
way, and the only other way that ever heard
of, and that Is by considering all the inde-
pendent acts and facts, where proven against,
and from the consideration of those facts infer
conspiracy Now you can not establish con-
spiracy In both these ways. You can take
either one, but you can not take both under
the law, because if You did you would be rea-
soning in circle, method that is forbidden
in logic. 1t is forbidden even in the logic, and
1t is not admissible at all in a court of law.
You can consider all the proven facts, and
from that infer the conspiracy, if a conspiracy
is proven by that process beyond all reasonable
doubt But you can not take partially proven
conspiracy and then infer that the act proven
is in conformity with the conspiracy.
ONLY FACTS CAN COUNT.
It is fair and it is right under the law that
when you are weighing any circumstance
against Daniel Coughlin you should look at
that circumstance in the light Of law, but not
in the light of facts proven against the other
man; but do object to this jury or this Court
taking a partly proven conspiracy, and from
that giving color and character to the individ-
ual circumstances and acts which are proven
against my client That is forbidden method.
Now, let us see briefly if there is a conspiracy
here, established beyond reasonable doubt, to
which Daniel Coughlin is party. They do not
claim THAI bu0 u6CldTaLlOQS OIL L06 pdTIleS IN
the camps the various meetings constitute
any proofs OF the conspiracy, except inferen-
tally and by process of reason. l will tell you
that does not constitute any proof at all.
never heard presented as absurd theory Of
conspiracy as the State presents to us in this
case. 1t is an unnatural and unreasonable
theory to begin with. 1t is true that they had
their factional differences; it is true, perhaps.
that Cronin led one faction, and that some
other party led another. 1t is true that that
man was disliked and despised by half his
brethren in that society; it is further true that
he had his friends and his idolizers in the other
branch. 1t may be true that he was the subject
of censure, it may be true that short time be-
fore he met his death fault was found with
him.
THE DoINGS OF CAMP 20.
But what does all that proven Take their
theory and give it the most favorable construc-
ton possible to them, and at the most it only
proves that in that camp there were number
of men who disliked CrOnin. number OF men
who disliked his performances in his own camp,
a number of men who were inclined to censure
him for some supposed violation of their camp
rules. That is the most that can be made of it.
What kind of camp was it? How many men
participated IN it? It ran from one mp to two
or three hundred; don't know the full num-
Der. know that the proof shows that 40 men
were present on the night they say this con-
spiracy was planned. Whoever heard of any
such thing since the world began? Planned,
too, under the very eye of his best and most in
timare and .warmest friends. A most likely
proposition. Preposterous upon its face, un-
likely in its very aspect; who can believe it oc-
CURED IN that way? No one, unless he is de-
sirous of believing IT.
Why, the circumstances that they have ar
rayed here to show a conspiracy in Camp 20
would lie at the door of any of the other men
who participated in the meeting of the camp
that night. Is there anything suspicious about
it? 1t may be barely suspicious-what inter-
probation are you going to put upon the States
proof? Are you going to draw inferences from
1t that are not there and are not lawful? The