t as he was rounding up his brightest and most
luminous period, Judge Longenecker brought him to a dead halt by
asking, in a matter-of-fact tone, what the authorities did to the
man who cut the rope.

The appeal for the prisoners was closed on the following day
(Wednesday, Dec. 11th,) when Mr. Forrest again spoke for five
hours. He went over, in detail, the evidence relating to Dinan's
horse, ridiculing the testimony of Mrs. Conklin and dwelling on the
conversation between Coughlin and Dinan, to show that the former
had given the correct version of it, and that therefore there was a
presumption in favor of his innocence. There was no evidence that
Coughlin had any motive for desiring Cronin's death, and the main
testimony against him was that of thieves and keepers of
disreputable resorts; nor was there any proof that Burke was
connected with the crime. Concluding the most lengthy speech of the
trial, Mr. Forrest said:

FORREST'S PERORATION.

"Now, Gentlemen of the Jury," continued Mr. Forrest, "I want you to
find Daniel Coughlin and Martin Burke not guilty. Why? Because
there is not established in this case a conspiracy in which it is
alleged these men participated. In other words, to save my strength
and not to exhaust your patience, there is nothing proved in this
case beyond reasonable doubt that will connect them or either of
them with the killing of Dr. Cronin. It is not necessary for me to
repeat that. Now, then, I ask you to acquit them and when I ask you
to acquit them, I ask you simply to do your duty--nothing more.
Nothing has been left undone against them that could have been
done. The State has had several able lawyers, and they have
insulted every witness called for the defense. Every man called for
the defense has been called a murderer or a sympathizer with
murder. Everything has been done to insult and break down witnesses
for the defense. Everything that intimidation in the court-room and
out of it could do has been done in behalf of the State; everything
that insinuation could do, has been done on the part of the State.
The Court has given them the widest range of cross-examination, so
there can't be any fault found in that respect. All the evidence
which they offered was admitted by the court. We have the State's