The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1894-01-22

:
which is said to have been one OF the
best appeals made in this famous trial.
This morning the instructions to the
Jury WILDE argued before Judge Camp
bell, and-in the afternoon at o'clock
the Jury will receive the instructions.
How long the case wilLhang in the
scales of uncertainty is a matter entire
& " problematical5~ and which only the
jury can~tell.
Mr.. Russell resumed Saturday morn
4 ing at $3.50 o'clock and opoke Tor over
. five hours and reviewed the case from
beginning to end. He said the con-
testants haye measured the human
mind with callipers, and have brought
m much in to tho case regardinga delusion
In respect to- the children, and declare
that Mr. Reilly was delnded and de.
mented individual. The speaker tnen
proceeded to quote from Weat Virginia
cases similar TO the one on trial: ne
would not bring into -conslderatlon
cases and questions entirely foreign TO
the case on trial. One opinion cited de-
clares that 1t is to be shown whether
the testator had sense and reason
enough to make will. BE said that IN
strong mind the eccentrlcltles arc
s generally moro noticeable. Tho Luna
ford case was cited by the speaker, one
II that compares in similarity with the
present case The law in that case
II SAYS that whimsicalities do not
affect competency to mako will. 1t is
shown that Michael Reilly had sense
enough to get $4,000 for his share OF
the Windsor hotel property. and yet it
is claimed that he had not. enough
eonse to make his own will. This opln-
ion saws that the testator may not DO
nf
: duties of-life, and yet be competent to
make will. The law says it is suih-
Gent il q man can recollect his prop
erty and the objects of his bounty.
This opinion further states that man
may give his property to whom he
pleascs, disinheriting his children II ne
so desires. 1t does not
MAKE TIE WILL INVALID
when it is shown that MIR. Reilly held
feelings OF resentment toward his chill
dren, whether they were just or unjust
What then becomes OF all this tissue
that the contestants have built up IN
b thie trial? Take out the West Virginia
decieions and the whole structure tum-
#blea to the ground.
MIR. Russell then proceeded to takc
up the evidence offered by the contest
s. ants tending to show that Michael
Reilly was insane when he made tho
will in contest. They have convicted
Mr. Reilly OF going to sleep and say this
4 Is evidence OF insanity. He had gone to
y sleep in the midst of interesting CONVEX
eutions, yet members OF this jury have
y gone to sleep in the midst OF arguments.
Tho contestants had brought UP DR..
S Stnnsbury to prove that Mr.. Reilly
laughed at his own jokes. The gentle
mon on tho other side, be said, have
frequently laughed ut their own jokes,
undoubtedly, and no one doubts their
= sanity. This claim is absurd. Then
they say Mr.. Reilly was absent minded;
no evidence of insanity. He COM
mented on the manner in which Mr..
Hubbard had counted out-his sides
witnesses and-called 1t childish. Re
garding Mr.. Reillvs Misunderstanding
OF an assessment, he claimed this was
merely II mistake, something any man
81 is liable to do.
AS to the strength of Mr., Reilly's
5mind tho speaker called attention to
the letters written by the old man re-
e garding Chicago real estate. He read
Zone Of the letters, which Mr. Hubbard
had characterized rs "im1ecile and
mere driyel" He said it was anything
s but that, and that on the contrary it
showed that the old gentleman was
: looking after and attending to the Chic,
ago interests.
HezneXt took up the
ist SUBJECT OF MoNoMANIA,
which the contestants allego possessed
8 Mr. Reilly in his later years. The con-
IS testants have brought in-testimony that
Reilly held certain opinions regard
ling his children. he claimed that it
sdevolved upon the contestants to show
. that% Mr.. Reilly had arrangement OF
his mind rs distinguished from q pre-
55iudice against his children. A decision
S4so Of tho court OF rappeals was quoted in
support of this position. Referring
IacafIi+to the delusion Michael Reilly
is claimed to have had in regard-to his
children the speaker recalled the .testl-
mony Eat O'Neill and said that he did
not characterize Reiily,s delusion
4 ms .simply horrible but that his treat
ment of his children was horrible.
So O'Neill never imagined that he was
saving such thing az council for the
other side claimed he said. As to the
& incident when Mr.. Reilly refused to al
sss low Thomas to go into the banking
* Business, had not Mr.. Reilly said, 81
cannot get along without Tom 2" Re-
ferring to Michael, he saii~he may have
81 come back aiter-twenty years TO yindl-
g cate himself us n man, but no had not
come back to follow his old father to his
= grave. ~ Init he does come back for is
s# to attempt to break- hla tather's Will
AS to James, Mr.. Reilly cherished the
insane deiusion that he played poker.
81 This the contestants did not disproye.
AS to j ohm it is not shown that he ever
did any work. He took care of his
M othersfor: n long time and is to be hons
ored for that. But his mother died q
s. long time ago, and he has not done any
S thingsipce, W hat about George Reilly?
- George went into business for blmsetf
= ~ Eb;rg tbnr on6prsed notes for him.
Heidi not consider George or ] ohm CO.
81 pable OF attending toEan estate the size
heleft behind him. The jury has been
RS led 70 believe that Mr.. Reilly's antipa-
s. thy toward his children was something
awful aud that it was momania.
There is no monomania aboutit, said tho
speaker, It is not claimed that Michael
Reilly was a perfect man. de- had had
SsiFwea knesses lust as other men have
go he had trnil b Los