Wheeling Sunday register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1882-1934, 1894-01-21

| might have thrown light upon this matter.
and he recalled that he was asked whether
any suggestion as 10 the will came from
anyone else than Mr.. Reilly. and he had
| answered there was no such suggestions
| from any quarter. And little farther on
| he said Bishop kain and Father Sullivan
bad no personal feeling in the matter.
| They had done what they were doing be-
| cause they could not have done less, aud
| not have been recreant 10 their trusts.
| They would not have been At 10 walk the
| streets, al they would have been UNIT
| for their holy Offices as priests Of the
Catholic Church IL they had not come into
| Court aud established Michael Reilly's
| will as they had established IL. He would
| not say tried 10 establish it, because the
| jury could no longer have any doubt that
| 1t had been establish shed.
| The visits OF Father Sullivan 70 the store
| OF Mr.. Reilly was next referred 70. and as
| TO the sugar room interviews he said that
seemed 10 DO a favOrite place for MIR.
| Reilly to hold confidential conferences
| he didn't want his clerks or his officlOus
son James 20 overhear, because ne had
taken James II. Rogers there as well Faith
| err Sullivan. His colleague, MIR. Riley,
| had said that in this regard, the contest
ants had proved too much. and he thought
SO, too, aud said in his opinion II they had
| proved two or three visits on the part of
Father Sullivan before the making of the
Will, and had then stopped there, they
| would have made
FAR STRONGER CASE
against Father Sullivan than the one they
had. These visits extended over months as
well before as after the making of the will.
and II the visits before the making OF the
Will were to have il made q certain way
then those after the will was made must be
explained upon some other theory. Mr..
| Hubbard had suggested that the visits
after the will were for the pur-
| pose OF keeping il in exist
ence-'that Eather SuIlivan lna,-v ,ybar
| ne had good thing and wanted TO keep it,"
But THIS was only suspicion like the
others, and the reverend gentlemen could
not be suspected OF such a dark deed upon
any such evidence and he fastened TO tell
the jury that all the attacks which had
been made upon Father Sullivan were not
meant The gentlemen on the other side
ara not believe in ii any mors than the jury
ala or tho speaker did. All the aOuse OF
rather Sullivan was TO be taken in a PICK
wickian sense and was not meant at all
IL gave counsel on the other side chance
10 be eloquent but that was all, and they
knew that the reputation and fame and
GOOD name OF Bishop Kahn and Father Sui
Ivan were safe In the hands Of the Jury
IL was done on the principal upon which
some lawyers acted. Their rule Was "if
you are short on your law Dear on your
tacts, and II you are short on your facts
pear on the law, and if you are short on
both facts and law abuse your adversary
II was this way with the other side in this
case. They were short on both law aud
fact and they have taken il out on Father
Sullivan.
The speaker thought, IL Father Sullivan
had wanted 10 have concocted such n
scheme, he would have gone to Mr.. Reil-
Tvs house, where he could have seen him
| alone and unobserved. rather than have
gone to his place OF business and there run
the gauntlet OF all that mob Of intended
witnesses. That would have been the
| thing to do, If there was such dark and
minnignt scheme on foot
lie referred TO the statement that the
WILL had been misrepresented in the pa
pers and on the streets, and said he knew
that however that might be, IT had not
been misrepresented by any paper or any
person as it had been oy the other side OF
the case on the floor of the Court room
lie took M the question of comm ssions
the hrst year OF the trust, explained the
| law, ana SAID the commits SiOns were al
| lowed by Court order, and IL there were
| large transactions in any one year the com
sions would be large, while if the sales or
transactions were small tho com omissions
| would likewise be small in proportion
Father Sullivan's interests were Just the
same as Bishop Kain's, yet the prog ramIne
mad been TO laud Bishop kaiu 10 the skies,
lest they trod too heavily upon some Catho-
| Tic S toes, and TO abuse Father Sullivan as
lucA as they liked. The responsibility Of
! ootn were great, and the compensation
ALi'N Ed III THE COURTS
would not be extraordinary, in view OF
what rested upon them. The will was not
benefit 70 them, but WAS for the benefit
| OF the children, and that being so he asked
| Where is the foundation, then, for this
| vile attack upon Father Sullivani What
Is the location for this able effort 10 sully
/ auu OeSmlrch Father Sullivan and BishOD
! Kaini Nothing" The will was not ri III
TO the church Of 5000, 600, nor yet gift OF
100000 TO Bishop Kain and Father Sull-
van. IL was not tying up of the estate
out the placing OF 10 in a condition wnen il
could earn as much as when Michael
! Kelley was in charge OF it. "Disinheritedl
! Who is dIsinherited! Michael! Michael is
| the man; and why should h 9 not be disin-
| heritedi He was disinherited under the
| terms OF the will OF 1855. Let US see what
] that will says:
| al bequeath $40 to my son. Michael
! Kelly. i do not think he is entitled to
| more in addition to what ne has already re-
ceived from me-" And what does the will
OF 1891 say:
| az direct nv executors TO nav IN M
son Michael, $40 and no more. ! do not
| think he is emitted to more. in addition to
that he has already received from me-
EXACTLY the same thing in both wills
and Michael Reilly was sane in 1850"
In like manner no looked at the prOvis
| ions OF the wills ia respect to James. and
said there was no doubt but that the will
| or 1871 was far more beneficial one for
! James than the will Of 1850. and in 1855
| Michael Reilly was sane. The fact was
! he thought, that the children were the ben.
| ehciaries under the will OF 1891. except as
10 Michael, whose father seemed 10 nave
/ an insane delusion that he was Dad bow.
| and which delusIon seemed 10 have been
| fairly well founded" and he argued and
insisted that the document was a
| right aud proper one, aud should
| be maintained. There was no reason
| why the will should DO set aside
In the opinion OF the speaker. aud as he
neared the conclusion Of bis speech he
| briefly recapituiated the leading points of
| his argument, and said If Michael Reilly
at the time he was debating the terms of
the will, had been as far gone i'm senile
| uementia as the other side would have the
! Jury 0elicve-if he was a driveling imbe-
/ Gle or an oyster as Mr. Hubbard had
lkened him tO-nO amount Of coaching by
| Father Sullivan at the sugar room would
| have enabled Michael Reilly to repeat in
Mr.. Lambs office tho elaborate scheme set
! forth IN tic Will. 10 was proposition
not self-evident bat self-contradictory. and
would DO so recognized by all.
Closing he said tho jury had the pover
/ 70 say that the fair fame OF Bishop X ain
and Father Sullivan should be suu'ed. and
had the power 20 ratfy the conduct of