ed in manner and form as charged in the indictment in
this case, then such of these defendants, if any, whom the jury
believe from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt were parties
to such conspiracy, are guilty of the murder of the said Cronin,
whether the identity of the individual doing the killing be
established or not, or whether such defendants were present at the
time of the killing or not.

"Under the charge of conspiracy against any of the defendants to
commit murder, it must be proven, beyond every reasonable doubt,
that such defendant combined with one or more persons in the common
purpose and with the common design to murder the deceased before
you will be justified in believing that the conspiracy existed as
charged against him. Although you may believe that the defendant
Burke rented the Carlson cottage and removed the furniture and
other articles mentioned in evidence from 117 South Clark street to
the said cottage, and although you may further believe that Dr.
Cronin was murdered in the Carlson cottage, you are advised that
these acts of the defendant Burke in themselves are insufficient to
justify you in concluding that he was a party to the alleged
conspiracy, unless it further appears, beyond all reasonable doubt,
that such acts of the defendant Burke were deliberately and
willfully intended by him to assist in the perpetration of the
crime of murder.

"Although you may believe than Dinan's horse and buggy was used on
May 4th to take the Doctor to his death, you are advised that the
act of the defendant, Coughlin, in engaging such horse and buggy is
insufficient to justify you in concluding that he was a party to
the alleged conspiracy, unless it further appears beyond all
reasonable doubt that such act of the defendant, Coughlin, was
deliberately and willfully intended by him to assist in the
perpetration of the crime of murder.

"Although you may believe that the contract between O'Sullivan and
Dr. Cronin was used on May 4th to decoy the Doctor to his death,
you are advised that the act of the defendant, O'Sullivan, in
making such contract of itself is insufficient to justify you in
concluding that he was a party to the alleged conspiracy, unless it
further appears, beyond all reasonable doubt, that such act of the