Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1894-01-13
Afternoon sessiou.

Oc either 10 lE3lSL upon their
stand or abandon il.
Afternoon Session
At the opening of the session Mr.. Rus
sell SAID they felt like insisting upon the
evidence, after such examination as could
be made during the recess, citing from the
authorities he had looked at among them
t'orney v. Terrell, w. Va, and he
thought that decision was In line with the
rule laid down by Greenleaf secs. III and
l'2. He held broadly that when one party
70 a suit had madean admission, that could
DO introduced as evidence against other
parties TO IL, although they had made no
admS Sions and know nothing of that
made. Mr.. Hubbard was not disposed TO
argue il. and said il the Court was disposed
TO admit IL under exception, they had no
objection.
Mr. Russell-Well, we'll take the risk.
The Court allowed it to 20 in.
Mr.. Russell then said the wit
ness wanted TO correct his evil
dence rs 10 letters marked Ex-
hioits Nos. - and 80, being of June 5, 1891,
10 h. a Cummings IL Co. Witness said
he at tirst could not recall the facts, but
now be- recalled that the first letter was
written after discussion between James
and his father, at the dictation OF his faith
er, but before he mailed IT he exhibited il
TO James and John. The reference TO the
eighty acre tract did not meet with their
approval, and he wrote the second letter
ana mailed 1t. saying nothing 10 Mr.. Reilly
about the change
Witness said Mr.. Reilly usually had the
papers at the store-or had the paper i'm
his hands-he usually got the paper the
first thing after the mail was disposed or
The mail was generally read 10 him-but
not the entire mail. The orders were not
read TO him, being acted on by witness
with MIR. Reilly's general knowledge
sometimes we
PICKED OUT LETTERS
we thought might stir his anger. 1t did il
sometimes, and l suppose others did So
MIR. Schulz usually opened the mail; he
did II almost always the last six or seven
months. The letters picked out would be
complaints from customers about delays in
Milling orders, etc" Mr. Reilly only took
the REGISTER at the store.
Witness was then asked as TO the paw
ments made since Mr. Reilly's death 10
Mrs. James Reilly, George Reilly, John
Reilly and MIR. Jamison. lOojection;
overl uled, and exceptions. Witness pro-
said:
"From June /, 1892, until March 15,
1873, Inclusive, they received $3.50 month
each"
Odd they receive anything before
June l, 1893! Ayes. On Nav 10. 1892:
the checks call for different amount. They
were charged on my books with 5000
Q.-Who was. A.-Each OF the parties
named in your question. Some had got
groceries up TO that time, but settled on a
basis OF 5000, and the groceries deducted.
Ihat made the checks call for different
amounts
Q,-Is that all they received up TO Jan.
uary l, 1891! An the way OF checks,
yes.
Odd they receive anything else, A
Is, 1892.
Q.-Was that a loan Ayes.
Mr.. Hubbard: Make your own case,
gentlemen. 1t will so ia or not. Just as
Geo aheadi A.-Read the notel
A.-Yes! At is note dated Feb.
ruary Is, 1872, for 900, TO John j. Kain
and j. Il. Sullivan, executors, signed John
d. Reilly. There is a similar note for the
same amount, by George Reilly, and others
OF like nature by Helen NJ Jamison.
Irene j. Reilly, and Mrs. j. Reilly. Each
note is endorsed by all the parties, four
endorsing in each case for the one who is
on the face as the maker
Q.-Have these notes been paidi A
No, but interest has.
Witness said after March 10. 1893 other
sums had been paid, monthly, but he had
no memoranda, and he could not recall
them. one or two exceeded the usual
monthly payments, and in addition 10
that they received 81 ,37O.g5 divided into
four checks, OF 1912 - as to three and R342
10, 1872. They continued TO receive the
$3.50 per month ia addition.
Mr.. Russell said he could show what the
family OF Mrs. Thomas Reilly aud Miss
Matilda Reilly had received, but ne did not
care 10 press II, III the other side objected
MIR. Hubbard said he understood that
they had offered evidence as to all the
heirs.
The Court said 1t 50 understood it,
Mr. Russell said he had offered TO prove
IN ~ ~ a
Jamison, but that Mrs Thomas Reilly aud
her daughter, Miss Matilda, were not con
testants but prOpodents.
Mr.. Hubbard asked when that appeared,
and Mr. Russell said IL appeared by he
and his cO-cOunsel appearing for them.
Counsel on the other side doubted IL, and
the matter was debated for some time
Finally, there being no objection, witness
said he stated for all when he stated for one.
except as 10 the division OF the 81, 300. MIR
Hubbard said ne would like 10 know the
exact amount and witness said he would
have 10 refer 10 his books. Witness said
all i've Interests had received : 100 q month
from june /, 1892, with the additions men
TONED, and II was the latter OF which he
could not speak with exactness
Witness thought, as % the mental condi-
ton Of MIR Reilly In June, 1921, and before
and alter, be fully understood what be was
doing and that his mental capacity was all
right did not think be was AS strong as
a younger man, but had no reason 10 be
l'eve or aid not think hes did not understand
question '7 his cain moments"
'.I-. -ENAMGNATION.
Witness sH| bis compensation and the
compensation VI others was charged up as
expenses Of the estate. john Reilly was
not married James was married aud had
a family. George was married and Mrs.
JamIsOu had two children. George and
james and Mrs. JamisOn were all Keeping
house here. Tue executors had paid the
families tlO.5OD in year.
q How much did the executors charge
up for themselves. Was 10 $4,000. A.
] cannot tell.
Q.-Weil, give Us the amount as near as
you can. A.-You will have TO wait until
j can look az the books. ] cannot
Big. b7t bad