Democratic Sentinel, Volume 13, Number 39, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 18 October 1889 — CRONIN JURY BRIBERY. [ARTICLE]

CRONIN JURY BRIBERY.

A BOLD CONSPIRACY TO BRIBE THE CRONIN JURY. A Scheme to Defeat the Ends of Justice by buying up Jurors In the Cronin Case— Six Men Indicted and Under Arrest. [Chicago telegram.l Another sensation has developed in connection with the Cronin murder case, being no less than a bold conspiracy to pack and bribe the jury, in order that a verdict of acquittal should be found or at least a disagreement regarding a verdict. In consequence of the discoveries made by the authorities a special grand jury was asked for by the State's Attorney Friday. This jury was at once summoned and after an all-day session Saturday returned indictments against the following persons: Alexander L. Hanks, Mark L. Saloman, Frederick W. Smith, Thomas Kavanaugh,. Jeremiah O’Donnell, and Joseph Konen, Immediately on the report of the special grand jury Saturday night, the six men named in the indictment, having been taken to the State’s Attorney’s office on various excuses, were place under arrest, four being placed in the county jail and two taken to the Chicago avenue station. At the jail Sunday a close watch was kept on the cells occupied ,-by Kavanaugh, Soloman, O’Donnell and Konen. The men wore not visited by any one, but a basket of fruit was sent in to Konen in reply to a message sent to his house. Q In the first place this conspiracy, of which Luther Laflin Mills says f ‘there has been no more unscrupulous, audacious, or wicked attempt to interfere with the cause of justice,” was revealed by one of the veniremen whom it was sought to corrupt. George Tschappat, foreman of the Page Lard Refining Company at 44 Erio street, was summoned as a juror last Tuesday afternoon. He was not examined that day and came again Wednesday morning, remaining with the other unexamined jurors in the ante-room. About 10:30 o’clock Wednesday morning Bailiff Mark L. Soloman, with whom he was well acquainted, met him and invited him out to have a cigar. This civility extended, Soloman asked Tschappat if he didn’t want to make some money. Tschappat gave themost natural reply in the world, an affirmative one.

“Very well, then,” responded Soloman, “you get on the jury and stick for an acquittal and you shall have $1,000.” Soloman further told Tschappat that the arrangements could be carried out with his wife. The money could be paid to her. and if paid by a certain day she should appear in court wearing a certain colored dress. If it were not paid to her she should wear a different dress. Tschappat replied that he was not that kind of a man. To this Soloman responded that he was working for the court, and pointing to a buggy standing outside said: “That is my horse and buggy.’.’ At the noon adjournment Tschappat went to bis place of business, returning at 2 o’clock. He was examined somewhat later and was excused for cause at 4:30, he having said that he could not give the defendants a fair trial. As he was leaving the building Soloman met him and said: “Where were you this noon time? I looked everywhere for you. They said to me they would ‘make it $5,000, and d —n him, make him do it.’ ” Tschappat on his way to his place of employment met his employer, Mr. Page, to whom he told these circumstances. Mr. Page told him to say nothing about it until he saw him again. The next day, Thursday, Mr. Page went to the court room and repeated the statement to Mr. Mills, wii*i whom he is intimately acquainted. Mr. Mills held an interview with Tschappat, who reported the story as he had told it to Mr. Page. Tschappat was then invited down to the State s attorney’s office and seated in the ante-room. Bailiff Solomun was then called in and closely questioned. He denied everything. He was immediately confronted with Tschappat, and, realizing his position, he broke down, and made a full confession, in which he implicated those who were indicted Saturday night. Soloman’s confession in its material points is that he was handed a list of corrupt or corruptible jurors by Bailiff Alexander L. Hanks, who said: “If we get a man on this jury to fix it, or if you fix one man, it means $2,000, half of it for the juror and the other half for us. ” Further, Soloman was to approach the veniremen he knew and Hanks those he was acquainted with. Immediately on Soloman’s confession Hanks was arrested, and he too confessed and produced a list of talesmen which tallied with So’oman’s. Each man whose name was on these lists was immediately sent for. These are the men who were somysteriously brought to the State’s Attorney’s office Friday night. Some of them' at least told all they knew readily, and from their statements the connection of Frederick W. Smith, Thomas Kavanangh, and Jeremiah O’Donnell was established. The sixth man indicted is Joseph Konen, a fruit dealer at West Madison street. He has been summoned as a juror, but has not yet been examined. He was offered SI,OOO to go on the jury, with a promise of $5,000 in case of an acquittal. He failed to report this to the authorities, leading to tho inference that he had accepted the offer, and for this reason doubtless he was indicted. Frederick W. Smith is ostensibly a hardware manufacturer’s agent at 135 Lake street. He comes from Conneticut His father-in-law is James Reynolds, and it is thought he is no other than the James Reynolds of New Haven who is ex-treasurer of the Clan-na-Gael triangle. This however Smith denies. Mr. Hynes says Smith was indicted for purjury at Oshkosh. Thomas Kavanaugh, another of the indicted men, was the engineer at the county insane asylum during the “boodle” days, and his name and management at that institution figured frequently in the investigation of that institution made by the State board of charities in November, ISBS. In January of that year he assaulted Dr. Kiernan because of some strictures made by the doctor on his methods of heating the asylum. He was arrested and tried by a jury in Justice Lyon’s court. It is said the jury was packed. At any rate, it was of so bad a character that Justice Lyon removed two of the jurors. The places of these two, however, were taken by employes of Brown & Tubman, now Kavanaugh & Brown. Kavanaughon this trial was defended by AlexanderSullivan. ■! .1 /,! f I I'z I -1 Ij i t' i(i ' h 1 I