CAUSE OF DR. CRONIN'S DEATH.

At the opening of the afternoon session, Mr. Forrest began the
discussion of the cause of death. "It is said by the learned
gentlemen who represent the people, that our defense on that
question is technical, but I deny it, and I will satisfy you that I
am right and that it is a substantial defense. They will tell you
it shows the weakness of our case. Gentlemen, I am engaged in
defending the lives of these men, and I will avail myself of any
technicalities and of any and every question in order to perform my
duty. I will show you that it is not technical, and for this
reason. They can try us again, they can indict us for causing death
by hanging, by suffocation, by apoplexy, and also by causes
unknown, and you are asked to convict under this indictment to
repair the blunder of the State's Attorney. This is a very simple
proposition of law. If I charge you with stealing my money I must
prove you stole my money, and it will not do to show that you stole
my potatoes; but if you are again indicted for stealing my potatoes
you can only plead you didn't steal my money. Suppose the body was
burned after a man was poisoned, would you be able to prove that he
was poisoned? No, but you would have to charge in your indictment
that he died from causes unknown. It will not do to simply prove
that this man, Dr. Cronin, died from violence; that is not the
question. The indictment charges death from wounds on the head,
face and body. There is no evidence of any wound on the body, so
that is excluded, and you are reduced to the supposition of wounds
on the head and face. It is not a technical defense, as I say,
because an acquittal on this indictment does not prevent their
being tried a half a dozen times under different issues. I will now
refer to the testimony of Dr. Egbert. In his examination, which I
will read to you, he describes the wounds on the head, but
distinctly and emphatically says that he can not say whether the
arteries were cut. The counsel for the State very adroitly put
their questions as to whether the arteries were involved, and he
said they were. He meant that the arteries were in that region.
However, Dr. Egbert testifies that the man did not die from
hemorrhage. Dr. Perkins next comes on the stand, and tells you