The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1894-01-20
REILLY WILL CASE
rCo11ti,,,sed from Third Page.l

what fire destroys may be restored.
5 James P. Rogers refused TO draw this
will, and isn't it potent evidence he had
good reasons What was it? MIR.
Reilly wasn't capacitivel He saw the
old man was laboring under such de-
fusion that he (Rogersl could not swear
he was of capable mind.
He referred TO Messrs. CLARK, Llst ana
{ Handlan, who had very little to do with
Z Mr.. Reilly. They cannot be classed
among those neighbors who have an
opportunity to test his capacity. In
connection with the evidence of Mr..
Clark, who said Mr.. Reilly was always
talking, the speaker compared this
trait to a story once told by President
5. Lincoln of a steamboat on the Sa2amon
river in Illinois. This boat had seven
: foot whistle and six-foot cylinder
Every time the boat whistled the ma
s chinery of tho boat stopped. It was
this way with Michael Reilly-eVery
time he talked his mind stopped.
- We have gone to the store and have
taken everybody who dealt with Mr.
Reilly-forty-odd witnesses drawn from
their connection with Michael Kelly,
who tell you how he acted; how stuPld
he was how he converted.
81 This case rests not solely on the con-
dition Of his mind generally, but there
4 is another branch-at and before the
: time he was incompetent; because his
mind was under delusion that pre-
vented him from doing rational act
On this question we come to mono
mania-a man in such state that he
has to be controlled and sent to an
= asylum. It ia rare to find an insane
man who does not have glim1Derlng OF
s sanity. Monomania is due to an abb
s normal increase in the channel OF
thought, says the authority. Its signs
Il are wandering mind and an absence OF
S mind. 1t is frequently manifested in
# self consciousness.
The mania arises from one fixed in
tense thought, the one thing pursued
z in this case, the pursuit OF wealth.
% The witnesses for the proponents have
z shown on the subject of capacity con-
set aside this will. Colonel OBrien
says he never saw stranger creature
he had
DISLIKE FOR HIS OWN CHILDREN.
Z The milk of human kindness had
4 turned to curdle. Dir. Reilly told Colo
mel O'Brien Tom had been overrated.
And then the old man told him not to
NEEDLE with his affairs. lie turned
against his children. Then there is
MIR. Rogers whose testimony is conclu-
B1VG. ne Shy6 Lue Oh Iual "ouid PIX
& fer to take the nd vice of outsiders. Mr..
Schulz and Mr.. O'Neill testify to the
manner of the old man to his sons and
( the latter said sit was terrible" The
men he had gathered around him at
z the store characterize his conduct to his
Sons az "horrible."
He would put it to the jury would
any natural father act as Mr.. Reilly did
when Colonel O'Brien went to him
I ". l. L. -I,H
there was nothing else in the case this
was sufficient as the act of a poor, de-
& luded old man, to set aside this will.
Reading further OF mental delusion he
s said it is marked by general breaking
3 down of the mind. The social affec-
tions are either broken or perverted,
just rs we proved here by Mr.. O'Neill.
"A man moved by mean motives may
disinherit his children, but if he docs it
on a deusiye idea that his children are
unworthy, the will cannot stand. If
such condition is shown the propon-
ents must show there was no undue in
tiuence exerted. If the will was made
without delusion then of course it is
valid, but if the delusion existed prior
to tho will and you see nothing but
al aliennted mind could make such q
s will, then the proponents must prove
the delusion had no effect on the maker
3 Of the will. We have proved the delu-
sion existed, and it is presumed to have
i existed if the will is an oficious one
which it is.
He read from Dew We. Clark in the
English reports, which shows the meth
3 cd of procedure in an ecclesiastical
court, now abolished in England. Here
s is physician named Stock who left a
will; he had an only daughter of the
highest character. She received the
worst of treatment, which continued to
the time he made his will. He read from
was regularly made, but denies it was
his act-he being OF mental incapacity
at tho time. 1t alleges an irrational an
q tipathy, and this case was founded on
that plea. He had no doubt AIessrs.
Lamb, Russell and Reilly signed this
{ will, but IL Michael Reilly was laboring
under n delusionit was not his act de
referred to the English case again, in
which tho opinion of Sir John Nichol
says this; the solicitor testified the
: maker was OF sound mind, just as Mr..
for the other side refrained from evil
dence tending to break down
the testimony OF the attesling
witnesses. This did not end the con-
test. Tho judge says the daughters po-
Z sition that her father was insane and
sane at different times Is upheld by the
law. The question was whether the de-
u fusion with regard tohis daughter had
any connection with insanity.
ABOUT THAT DIFFUSION.
AT tho conclusion of the opinion the
Judge says the impression formed is
whether the father is proved to have
y been in state of delusiou regarding
3 his child In this case we declare in the
face of all men there is no proof on the
6 part of these proponents regarding tho
& ill-chnracter OF these children.
Continuing, tue opinion says, take
out OF the case all of the girls good
character, this would little advance the
case of the proponents. Suppose in
this case Michael Reilly had a slight de-
3 feet OF the eyes and imagined that he
was blind. Suppose he supposed
Michael had made a breach of the peace
and the prosecution was abandoned. In
3 case fof q delusion, the magnitying OF
=. h oh zhaynnd I'LL hounds folloMs IL is