St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1888-11-27
KELLY WILL NOT KICK.
The Famous Case Against the
EX-Inspeetor Dismissed
by the Court.
Minneapolis Had No Claim on
the Money That Was Mis-
appropriated.
Tragedian Robert Downing
Will Wed His Leading Lady
Tomorrow.
Members of the S. P. G. A.
Are at Skies and
Sevens.

1t took the court yesterday but a very
few minutes to dispose OF two famous
Criminal actions which have been drag
ging along in the courts for nearly
twelve months. The cases were
against Thomas Kelly. eX-license in
spector. and John Z. Ward, eX-adjutant
OF police, who were both indicted at the
inStigati0n of certain politicians on the
charge of miSappr0priating money be-
longing to the city, and which came
into their hands by virtue of their being
ago when these indictments were
found, but, strange as it may seem,
never before has the state sabpGnaed
witness in either case, although they
have been regularly set for trial at each
term of court in the interim. The cases
became famous because of their pOliti-
cal significance. it having been gen
orally understood that the object in
both cases was to attack Mayor Ames
in case he was nominated on
the Democratic ticket for governor.
After Wilson received the nOmlna-
tor the cases were continued over UNI
til after election, and it was generally
supposed that they would be nolled.
1t is not known whether it was on ac-
count OF such Il rum0r that the county
attorney concluded to at last bring
them to trial or whether it was from
some other cause, but nevertheless he
has taken active measures within the
last few days to proceed with their
trial. In opening the case yesterday
morning against Kelly the county at
torney said that the state proposed to
show that 4 large amount of money
passed into the hands of the defendant
by virtue of his Office as license in
SpectOr, upon the preteXt or claim set
forth by Kelly to the people from whom
he collected the money, that the money
was collected for the city and to be paid
to the city treasurer, the money so col
lected coming from SaloOnkeepers, and
the money was to have been applied on
liquor licenses, but that the money was
retained by the defendant.
When the first witness was sworn r.
l.. Penney. the defendants attorney.
objected to the introduction Of any evil
dence OH the part of the state Oh the
ground that the charge specified in the
indictment did not constitute all offense
under the penal code. He said that
the city treasurer was the only officer
who could collect or receive any money
for the city; that police officer bore
the same relations in this particular to
the city as that borne by any other phi
vate individual. Mr.. Penney read the
law to sustain the point. The court
(Judge Young asked if the city could
have recovered the moneys collected by
the defendant and retained by him,
and observed that if the city could not
have collected the state had no case.
The county attorney thought it made
not the slightest consequence whose
money it was. 1t was only pertinent
that the officer claimed the authority to
collect, and that he assumed this au-
thority wrongfully. The court thought
it was frand or embeZZlcment rather
than anything else, rather than q mis-
appropriation of public funds. He said
under which the case was brought was
intended to protect the city from the
misrepresentation of money by city Off
cialS who are authorized to collect and
receive money for the city. The county
attorney read case, which he claimed,
covered the point under discussion. 1t
was case in which tax collector in
New York collected money and con-
verted the same 10 his own use. The
court in that case held that the defend
ant was guilty of larceny, and that it
was only necessary to form that
the money came into his hands
by virtue of his office. The court, how
ever, said that supposing even it was
the governor OF the state who had col
lected the money, he could not be held
under the statute, because he had no
authority to collect. He held that the
law only contemplated the punishment
of public officers who misappropriated
public funds, but only related to officers
whose duties authorized them to collect
mOueyS The pjtv had never come into
the possession of the money, and the
money could not have been the money
of the city, and therefore there could
have been no Misrepresentation of public
funds. The case was dismissed, where
upon the court advised the county at
tOrney to enter nolle in the case of the
state against j. E. Wards. the facts be-
ing the same as in the Kelly case, and
nOlle was accordingly moved.