The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1894-01-10

TO CHANGE HIS WILL.
In the interview in the Office AIR.
| Reilly said lie was not satisfied with ms
will; then they went outside and he
spoke about the provisions OF the Will.
lie said he wanted his will made IN
trust, and had an idea OF having a
trustee for various portions OF his estate;
one each for the business, real estate ara
stocks. In the conversation settleu
on the two present trustees. The terms
| mentioned we're about those set out IN
the present will. objection by Mr.
Hubbard; sustained.) He said he IN
tended to have his estate accumu4aIe
SO that the distribution would pc mere,
after; he spoke of the Philip Reilly Wlii
and asked if witness was acquainted
with that case. There were at this
point several objections to forms OF
Questions and answers by Mr. HuD.
| bard. The trust was 70 hoid
the estate together and was to
| continue to grandchildren; didn't re-
member whether the distribution was
to be among grandchildren or those
| children born after his death. Ihese
remarks were made in both converse
| tons. Witness could not state all that
happened. As to the children he satd
| the conversation was largely argument
alive. Mr.. Reilly said he did not want
| 4. leave his children the property be-
cause it would not be taken care OF, and
| it would be better to have it 90 to trus-
| toes who would take care OF 1t. Wit
| ness told E1r. Reilly he-knew the Phlllp
Reilly will cas-. Mr.. Reilly said it was a
lust will and he wanted to make a SINH
lar one. Dir. ReillY's talk about the
children, witness said was private, n
because OF the provisions about the
children the witness salt 1t was unjust
and
HE HAD DECLINED
to draw up the will. Witness insisted
tho children had assisted Mr.. Reilly in
accommodating the fortune and should
not be cut out. The old man spoke
particularly about Michael, and said
his children had bad business habits
and he did not want to leave them his
fortune. He said Michael was "a bad
b oy." Witness had two conversations
about the will. Mr.. Reilly had asked if
he could exempt the executors from
security, and if he could restrict prop
erty from being invested in ecclesIastl'
cal and educational property. These
conversations took place in the office.
After the witness refused to have any
thing to do with making the will Mr..
Reilly asked to whom he should go; he
told him to go to Mr.. Daniel Lamb. Mr..
Reilly said in defense OF his ideas that
they were just and he wanted them
carried out. He was shown the will,
which witness said was written by Mr..
Daniel Lamb. In view of his relations
tho witness chad no doubt of his capac-
ity when he was talking to me.
On cross : examination Mr.. Rogers
said he had seen Mr.. Reilly soff his
wind ~ how oftaD ha could not cav
The witness said that Mr.. Reilly was
wholly irrational regarding his child
rem; who, SO far as he knew. chad one
their part we'll" Mr.. Reilly would
fuss" with everybody without cause.
Witnees knew nothing of Father SuIli-
vans visits to the Reilly store; Mr..
Reilly mentioned the two gentlemen as
executors. AT the second interview he
seemed to have got rid of the idea OF
three business mon as executors; did
not know what brought about the
change. AS to the first times when Mr..
Reilly was "oG his mind" witness said
he was hard to got along with, with
some people all the time. For the.last
three or four years he was worse than
before. Mr.. Reilly said his. children,
were careless, not of good business
habits and could not accumulate. He
also said to witness regarding his former
Will LuuC E.=F-
SINCE THOMAS WAS DEA
he did not want the othors to benefit by
the will. Az to reasons for three
trustees, who should be experts, Mr..
Reilly said ne wanted matters fixed, sothe
business would not stop, and so it would
accumulate. This was his opinion ten
days before the time when he suggested
tho two present trustees. AS to the
first will witness said MIr. Reilly tore it
up very fine at the interview in tho
sugar room and threw it about on the
floor. Asked as to whether Bishop
Kahn and Father Sullivan were adopts
in groceries. stocks or real estate, wit
ness answered:
mo so far as I know"
"Was he anxious to have the business
continued ~
Witness said he had been told by Mr..
Reilly that he did not care what be-
came of the business. This was at the
last interview; two or three weeks be-
fore he had seemed anxious to have the
business continued.
HE had changed his mind, if he had
one," suggested Mr.. Hubbard.
On redirect examination to Judge
Melvin witness repeated it was hard for
some people to get along with Mr..
I Reilly. As to his "being off" he meant
he would go to sleep during business
hours that he would be hard to get
along with, and mould fly up and talk
hard about people. When not asleep
he was very shrewd in business. Wit
ness often urged Mr.. Reilly to sign his
name"A1ichael Reilly" instead Of "M.
Reilly" and there would often be a fuss
about it. He would abuse the clerks
without cause; che would never abuse
me-" He got a pretty clear understand
ing regarding the Reilly business dur
ing the fifteen years he acted as legal
advisor. AS to his un%willingness to
sign his name properly, he did not be-
lieve it hurt his business capacity to a
great degree. When in a good humor
and attending to business his capacity
was rs good as anybody's.
To Mr.. Hubbard the witness gave an
instance of business attended to by
Thomas and witness. They did not tell
Mr.. Reilly about it because they we're
afraid be would not take the proper
business course.
WHO DID THE BUSINESS.