The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1908-05-20

when he deposited a check for $780,
600 In the First National bank that
bank and payable on sight, and the
bank received $2S7 in interest on
money for collection that had lain all
the time in the vaults of that bank.
We have no direct evidence beyond
the circumstances surrounding the
case and the evidence of the states
witnesses to prove our assertions that
this was a deposit account, but that
is enough. Kelly says ii was a collec-
ton account. but his interest in the
case is such as to make an I'M
scrupulous man commit perjury Our
circumstantial evidence all goes to
prove that he testified falsely. He
had the state money in banks outside
of Topeka. he said, and there was
not a word of law to support him in
that act. He had money in his pet
Dank at Paola and his mushroom
smartest man that ever occupied an
once In the state house but he did
not cover up his tracks when he
placed money in banks outside of To-
peka In direct conflict with the state
law at that time. I asked him when
checks on deposit in the First Ma
t1onal that were drawn on the First
National. and he replied that he was
within the law and that it was the
custom Lawyer Kelly. His foot
slipped again. About three days after
doors Attorney General Coleman in
some way, discovered the fact, and
also that the state had over half a
million in the defunct bank, so he
sent telegram to Kelly's bondsmen
at Scranton, Pa, telling them that
State Treasurer Kelly, for whom your
company Is surety, has $4,000
wrongfully deposited in a bank that
has just failed. He is therefore short
that amount in his account with the
state and we hold you on your bond
of half million for that sum- Kelly
was charged in that wire from the
then attorney general of the state
with embezzlement. The attorney
general would have been Justified in
drawing up an indictment against his
friend Kelly. They called it a serious
thing then. but now they treat 1t
lightly.
"Mr. Kelly admitted while on the
stand that he deposited to the credit
of the states account checks totaIing
WIS that were not the property of
the state. In the case of the State
vs. Kelly and his bondsmen, brought
by this same array of counsel, we
find. In comparison with their claims
in this case, that the state has turned
a. summersault and has not yet
alighted on it's feet General Cole
man did not go off half cooked when
ne brought that suit against Kelly and
his bondsmen and made those serious
allegations against Mr. Kelly In his
petition. He did not file the suit for
over a month after the bank had
failed. Just wait, gentlemen of the
jury, until that case against Mr.. Kelly
Is tried In this court. 1 want to meet
you all here. He will hold a reunion.
You will then find these same coun-
eel
tons lawful demeaning for him all
they are worth. If 1 had such an
easy case as they have against Kelly
and his bondsmen 1 would send nv
office boy into court to try it. and he
would win it with ease. Why did
the states money first? It would ap-
pear that Mr.. Kelly is still possessed
OF all his old hypnotic influence.
Charges Officers With NEGLIGENCE.
Attorney General Coleman and 9TH
er members of the executive council
heard rumors of the treasury graft
months before the third day Of July.
Had they investigated the matter and
made an examination of the treasury
half million in the First National and
secured and placed it in the state
treasury where 1t belonged and there
would have been no case on trial here
today. 1 believe every officer of the
then executive council is open to crit
icism for allowing Mr.. Kelly to do such
banking with the state funds Mr..
Kelly must yet face Coleman's charges
of illegal acts while in offices. F.. S.
Jackson. the present attorney general,
who should be the leading counsel in
this case, why is he not here. He has
taken no part at all in these proceed
fngs, but has employed at a great ex-
pense to the state these eminent law
yers to conduct the states case. If he
appears in this case 1t would be for
Kelly. Is he keeping in the background
in order that he can prosecute Kelly
in the other case?. He should have
brought and pushed and won that other
case long ago. Why was it not brought
first? Kelly's bond is for $500, 900 Our
bond is for only $250,000 There was
$4,000 in the failed bank Had the
suit against Kelly's bondsmen been
pushed and won at the time immed-
lately following the failure of the bank
and the state paid it's half million on
the bond, the First National would
have been able to have paid 100 cents
on the dollar to the widows and work.
ing men of this city who had their
savings deposited there.
The hypnotic influence Of Tom Kelly
over the state officers prevent him
from being brought to the bar of JUS
tice to answer for his misdeeds. We
allege that the fact that this bank
through the Vaccinations of Kelly and
the carelessness of state officers was
allowed to have $4,000 of the states
funds in its possession; that the turn
ing over of this immense sum to the
bank prompted it to indulge in wildcat
methods of banking and brought about
it's failure. Kelly's account for 'collec.
ton was indirectly responsible for the
looting Of the bank, and therefore the
prime cause of it's failure and subse.
Quent inability to meet the demands OF
the state for the funds that were pro.
tected by this bond.''
TO SHORTEN THE TIME.