The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1894-01-17

y y.
i OF the deal the other side would nave
shown ii. SpeakingNof Mr. Quarters
/ testimony. he said the two were neigh
! .bors for thirty-one years, but yet ne
| ,testifies to but one transactlon-tne
| chamber of commerce incident: Inc
| sneaker then defended Mr.. Rellly,s COM
( plants regarding the smoking OF cigars
| in the room ar. Quarter said he DID
| NOT know whether or not the chamber
| .os commerce was an Incorporated BODY.
| If Mr.. Reilly had been the president
| and he did not know such thing, there
| would be
SCORE OF WITNESSES
to testify he was OF unsound mind. inns
is not against Mr.. Quarter at all, and
any man is liable to make such lncon-
sequential mistakes.
He regarded Mr.. Morris Horkheimer
one OF Wheeling's shrewdest business
men, and the transaction of which he
| testified took place month before the
| death OF Mr.. Reilly. The option was
declared off after controversy between
| the two, and the witness could not say
| that Mr. Reilly was at that time lncom-
| petent. Can testimony go further TO
show Mr.. Reilly was of sound mind
There are other transact!ons aLluUeo
| to bv the other side. One is regarding
| a meeting of the Ttnn Insurance Com
| panY at which Mr.. Reilly presided, and
| it was decided the company should
quit business. He said it was natural
| Mr.. Reilly should suppose there was TO
| be dividend when corporat!onen ends
| it's existence. Such q mistake IS per-
fectly natural.
AS to the election of Mr.. Zane as
superintendent of the State Fair
grounds, he explained the transaction
| One thing stands out prominent; there
were five or six candidates for the place,
and Mr.. Reilly had enough shrewdness
to secure the support of all other dlrec-
tors for Mr. Zane. Why Mr.. Reilly did
not vote for Zane is matter OF pro-
priety with him alone; he might have
felt delicacy in voting tor relative:
Another incident was that Mr.. Reilly
tried to purchase his own horse. How
ever, too many witnesses were brought
to testify on that transaction, and it was
shown great many teams were in use
in connection with the business. The
testimony of witnesses Mooney and Bach
man contradicts fatty, and the speaker
defended the action OF Mr.. Reilly who
had made but natural mistake.
He referred to the testimony OF
NIessrs. Bieberson and Reymann. asso-
ciates of Mr. Reilly on the State Fair
and Elm Grove boards. They say Mr..
Reilly was drowsy. Yet Mr.. Bieberson
could give no instance of when Mr..
Reilly brought up matters not peril
nent. Is it any wonder Mr.. Reilly did
not take that ELM Grove stock; 1t
was not paviug stock! This, taken in
consideration with the Franklin stock,
shows Mr. Reilly investigated person
ally and took q wise business course.
Mr. Reymann was asked as to incidents
and gave the one at the brewery, where
Mr.. Reilly wanted expenses curtai!ed IN
the Elm Grove Railway Company.
Upon that, among other things, MIR.
Reymann based his opinion as to Alr
Reilly's capacity.
He next referred to Mr.. Mendeps tes-
timony, and claimed it would be impos-
sible to remember prices on tho in
numeral articles in a furniture sales
room; the furnitus e man is relied upon.
This piece OF business shrewdness could
be gotten off on most any man, said Mr..
Riley.
MR.. RE1LLY's DRowsINEss.
A great deal has been said about the
drowsiness OF Mr.. Reilly. The other
side undertook to- show he was drowsy
and sleepy at all times. Not Witness
has brought Mr. Reilly in front of
business transaction who has dared say
he was then drowsy and sleepy. Tho
witness, Mrs. Roth, says the habit OF
r..
one. Mr.. Speidel testified in the same
strain. Other witnesses testified that
when Mr.. Reilly was thought to be
asleep he was really not, but was very
wide awake. This drowsiness does not
show lack of business capacity, but was
n habit Mr.. Reilly had INDUCED in for
years. Taking into consideration the
amount of business done by Mr.. Reilly
is it any wonder he should take maps
during the day. These things. when
you como to make up your verdict, do
not count It is on his business capac-
ity you should count. The other sido
do not picture Mr.. Reilly in real life.
lie could not help but think that the
witnesses for the other side knew OF
business transacted by the old man,
but did not detail them. They only
gave those they thought would influence
you in giving verdict for the CONTEXT
ants.
Considerable testimony is given to
show that James Reilly managed the
store, but he did not have anything to
do with the principal part OF the bust
ness; with the financial part and en-
| ploying and discharging he had moth
chases, and when particularly large
ones were made, Mr.. Reilly was con-
suited. Mr.. Reilly himself attended to
| the purchases Of the three lines largest
dealt in-four, whisky and meats. and
in doing this he showed good business
discretion. At times he took the pur-
chase of all lines into his own hands,
The testimony of Mr.. O'Neill shows
| Mr.. Reilly managed the finances
| OF the store and of all other
| business. The financial part is
the ono that requires the acute
| business qualifications-th man at the
helm. Does it not look unusual for
man of Mr.. Reilly's age to attend to
business az much as he did? Ia there
any evidence that any of the sons, after
Thomas death, took part outside the
management of the store, except when
they were sat down upon. Tie meat
business was exclusively managed by
| Mr.. Reilly. The evidence is that Mr..
Reilly went into the meat business in
1855. not 1891 rs stated by Mr.. Hubbard