River Falls journal. [volume] (River Falls, Pierce County, Wis.) 1872-2019, 1890-01-16
THEIR TRIAL WAS a FARCE.


That's what the Convicted Murcerers of
DF. Cronin Think. and They According
! " File a Motion for a New Hearing
Ahs%ed Errors Of the Former Cause
ReviewSd-New Evidence In Their Favor
Said to have Been hi covered.
CHICAGO, IAN. II.-Late yesterday
afternoon Attorneys r. NJ. Wing. Daniel
Donahoe and W. $. Forrest filed with
the clerk of the criminal court a motion
for new trial in the cases Of Dan
Coughlin, Martin burke, +. OSullivan
and John Kunze, convicted OF the MUIR
der of Dr. Cronin. The motion was filed
In accordance with the order Of Judge
Mcconnell, before whom the Arguments
will be made Monday.
The motion is very long. II covers
eleven typewriter pages and assigns
thirty-nine causes of error in the rulings
of Judge Mcconnell during the trial
of the case. These grounds of al
legged error embrace every point
contested by the attorneys for the de-
Tense, and range from an objection TO
the courts overruling the motion to
quash the indictments up to the as
sertion that the defense has, since the
trial, discovered new evidence which
entities them TO a new trial.
The first error alleged is that the
court erred in oyerruling the motion to
quash the Indictment made on behalf
of each of the defendants. The denial
of Coughlin's motion for a separate trial
is made the basis of four of the alleged
errors, there being a separate count for
each of the defendants.
The refusal of the court to permit the
defense TO show that Messrs. Mills,
Ingham and Hynes were employed in the
! prosecution by private parties who were
actuated by improper motives is alleged
to have been prejudicial to the defend
ants. The courts allowing these three
lawyers to assist in the prosecution is
said to be an error. Mr. Hynes is made
| a subject of a special count in the mo-
ton, in which he is said to have been
moved by a spirit of personal hostility
towards Coughlin, Burke and OSulli-
van, and was not fit to act as a prosecute
1 ing attorney.
The overruling of the challenge for
cause, preferred by the defendants to a
/ long list of veniremen whose names are
/ given in the motion, is further alleged
/ to be error. 1t is set forth in three
/ grounds of the motion that the court
erred in refusing to permit proper ques-
/ tions TO be put to veniremen by the de-
Tense.
/ 1t is claimed there was error in the
court allowing George l.. Corke, W. $.
/ North, C. f. Marlor, f. J. Bontecou and
b. f. Clark to serve on the jury against
\ the objection on behalf of Burke,
Coughlin, O'Sullivan and Kunze, whose
peremptory challenges had been ex-
hausted when these gentlemen were ex-
amined and accepted as jurors.
Judge Longeneeker's opening state
ment to the jury is cited as error and
characterized as improper and illegal
and preiudical to the rights OF
| the defendants. 1t is also alleged
TO have been error in the case for
the failure of the court to enforce the
/ rule excluding witnesscs for the State
/ from the courtroom during the trial.
1t is alleged that improper evidence
was permitted by the court to be offered
1 by the State. and that proper evidence
on behalf of defense was excluded.
1t is charged as error that the prosecu'
tion was permitted to introduce evidence
and exhibit to the jury the clothing. in
struments and hair of DIR. Cronin, the
false teeth, the trunk and all the ma
terial evidence in the case. The intro
/ duction OF DIR. Cronin's knives after the
State had closed its case is said to have
/ been in error. Objection is made tc
/ a number of the instructions given
\ to the jury by the court The
verdict is pronounced as contrary
to law and not justified by the evil
/ dence, and finally it is said that 1.-The de-
+ PENDANTS and each of them have dis.
( covered evidence which entities them
to a new trial" What this new evi
dence is the attorneys for the defense
viii not disclose till they read the afh
4 davits on the matter, which they viii
! read in court Monday morning.
]