The Courier. (Genoa, Nev.) 1899-1904, 1901-08-30
Carson Letter.

49, N---f'O
luton of partnership has been sadly
preiudged. 1t came on for trial in
Carson on the 23rd on an allegation
that the plaintiff was a partner, and he
testified to having invested $500 in The
concern, and that his brother put in
only $500. When the case was first
argued in Court on demurrer, Judge
Henry Rives made the sensational
statement that the case involved a
scandal that would startle the COM
munity, it being nothing less than a
railroad robbery. Upon this statement
the attorneys for defendant acted, and
when the deposition of the plaintiff
was taken before Notary he was
asked the question if the $500 he put in
was the proceeds of crime, and his
attorney advised him not to answer on
the ground that it would tend to in
criminate him, and he refused to an
swer all such questions, his attorney
knowing full we'll that no Court of
equity would listen to such case, but
would leave rogues where it found
them. On the trial, on Friday, he tes-
titled at first that the money was not
the proceeds of crime, but that his
brother had told he had found it. IF
this were true and If he had in fact put
any money in the concern as partner,
with the right to share in the profits
and losses, and the right of mutual
agency between himself and brother,
he would be entitled to one-half of the
property after paying off the debts.
On cross-examnation bis statements
became so absurd that he broke down,
and admitted that he had no reason to
disbelieve but that it was the proceeds
of crime, and therefore he had every
reason to believe it. Then his counsel
knew he had sworn himself out of
Court, and that night he arranged with
the Virginia & Truckee Railroad Com
pany to come into the case with petit
ton of Intervention, and the next
morning Judge Murphy came in with
a petition charging among other things
that Joseph Kelly had robbed the train
on the night of February 0, 1894, and
obtained $1,000, and demanded judg-
ment for the amount. Then counsel
for defendant moved the Court to dis
miss the case on trial on the ground
that it had no jurisdiction over the
subject matter. The Court refused to
dismiss just then, but instructed the
jury to find that the money that Hugh !
Kelly put into the concern was the
proceeds of crime. Notwithstanding
this instruction, the jury deliberated
long time on the ground that plaintiff
had sworn differently, and they could
not believe him. However, they COM |
promised the matter by inserting in
the question submitted to them the
fact that they were instructed to find
that way. During the argument Judge
Rives admitted that he had kept his
witness bridled, but now he would
take the bride off, and let him tell the
whole truth. This astounding admis-
sion is fully as bad as the statements
that the witness subsequently made.
In short, Hugh Kelly testified that his
brother Joe admitted to him that he
had robbed the train, and implicated
no one else in it. Hugh Kelly thus in
sisted that he believed the money had
been found, as long as he believed he
could establish a partnership, and as
soon as he saw he could not get any
thing himself, his counsel took the
bride off, and he testified that the
money he put in there was the pro-
ceeds of crime, to fulfill his threat
that if he could not get anything, he
would see that Joe didn't. There has
been no admission on the part of coun-
sci for defendant that any money Hugh
Kelly may have put in was the pro-
ceeds of a crime, but only an admis-
sion that Hugh Kelly testified that he
put in $500 and that said money was
the proceeds of a crime. The defend
ant and his attorneys deny absolutely
that Hugh Kelly ever put a cent in
to the concern, and deny that he ever
was partner. The fact is that Hugh
got wages regularly, and never bought
any goods, and never got dollar ex-
cept for wages, and did not even know
the price of the goods or the trade
mark. The complaint in Intervention
is astounding in view of the fact that
the express messenger who was robbed
testified on the examination of a per-
son accused OF the robbery that the
man who robbed him was a tall, thin
man, and Joe Kelly is short and stout
and entirely different in build from the
person accused, who was identified by
the messenger. Joseph Kelly has con-
Quoted prosperous business in Car
son for many years, and his credit has
been of the best. He was also ex-
amined before Notary most infinitely,