The Topeka state journal., 1911-06-10
Former State Treasurer Can't
Recover Money.
Paid 81, 300 to Miami County to
Cover Shortage.
HE WAITED TOO LONG
Higher Court Holds He Should
Have Acted Sooner.
End of Long Drawn Out
Controversy.

controversy.
The supreme court decided in an
opinion handed down today that Thos.
T. Kelly, formerly state treasurer, can
not recover the amount paid to. Miami
county by him to cover alleged def
ciencies in his accounts while clerk Of
that county.
In 1902 Kelly was a candidate for
state treasurer. 1t was publicly charS-
ed that while clerk Of Miami county
he had been guilty of misconduct wh1cn
resulted in losses to the county. In
February, 1902, the commissioners OF
Miami county made an inVesugat1on
of the matter and filed report IN
effect sustaining the charges against
Kelly He then presented written
PROPOSAL to the county commissioners
asking them to investigate and deter
mine whether he was indebted to the
county, and, if so, in what amount
agreeing to accept their findings. AT
the same time he deposited $1,000 with
them to cover any amount Tor Wnl':I
they might find him liable. The COM
missioners accepted the proposal, made
an investigation, and prepared writ
ten report to the effect that he WIS
indebted to the county in the sum OF
81. .324 80. They then notified Kelly of
the finding and requested him TO pay
the balance of $324.99, which he did, on
July Z. 1902. On July 8, 1907, he brought
an action agaifst the county to recover
the s1,32499. A referee reported in ms
favor and the district court approved
the report and rendered judgment ac-
cordingly, from which the county ap-
pealed,
The referees report was to the effect
that Kelly did not owe the county any
thing, but the supreme court held that
irrespective of that question, Kelly PAID
the amount demanded by the county in
accordance with his agreement to do
so, and that, having agreed to accept
the findings Of the commissioners, he
could not recover without showing that
the payment was induced by fraud,
duress, or mistake. 1t was held that
the payment was not induced by fraud
or mistake, but that, in any event, be-
cause of his delay in bringing the ac-
tion, his right to maintain it had been
lost, and was barred by the statute OF
limitations.
The supreme court, in affirming the
decision of the Shawnee court in the
appeal of Theodore w. Jones in his
ease against Helen c. Jones that had
been decided against him in the low
er court, declared, there is no merit
in this appeal. The defendant, Jones,
has been guilty of the grOssest kind
of fraud which persisted to the end
of the trial. The Judgment of the dis
and it is affirmed"
This is a unique finale to a noted
case. The troubles of Jones, who is
wealthy and well known Topeka
negro owning property in governors
square in this city, have been aired in
the papers. Jones has been accused
of bigamy and fraud and several 9TH
er things and his first wife tried to
hold the property by force, taking a
shot at Jones once with a pistol.
rfTI,. 4 n.E1 ,INc I. 20 Il
with the suit brought against Jones
by his second wife and gives Jones
$50, 900 worth of property in Topeka,
even though 1t was decided against
him. The intimation of fraud by the
court as applied to Jones is due to
the fact that this same Jones had
tried to show that his second wife
bought the Topeka property and that
therefore it was not his at the time
he married his first wife and she was
not entitled therefore, to division of
said property. In other words. Jones
wanted to divide his property with
Mrs. Jones No. 2, who had not tried
to kill him with pistol, rather than
to divide with Mrs. Jones No. l, who
had caused him all his troubles and
then tried to shoot him full of holes
on top of it al. But in the trial of
the case 1t was shown that Mrs. Jones
No. 2, even If she did buy the proper
ty, made the purchase with money
1uFn1SneQ ner Dy Jones.
The next step in this case will be
the effort of Mrs. Jones No. 1 to get
n division of the property decided by
the court to belong to Jones and not
to his second wife.
The supreme court today brushed
away another technicality when it sus-
tanned the Shawnee district court IN
the case of Mrs. Susie Peck against
the Merchants Transfer and Storage
company. The court held that the stor-
age company was liable in an action
of repIevin to the true owner of gools
placed in its warehouse by some one
else.
In this case Mrs. Peck shipped a lot
of household goods from Oklahoma to
Topeka These goods were seized by
the sheriff acting under an order of
replevin from an Oklahoma bank
claiming a title in them by right of a
chattel mortgage issued by Mrs. Peck 5
husband. The sheriff placed the goods
in the Merchants transfer warehouse
and the company sent the goods back
TO the Oklahoma bank Notwithstanding
that Mrs. Peck made demand on the
company for her goods as the rightful
owner and had started a suit in court.
for her goods. The lower court grant
ed a Judgment to Mrs. Peck for her
goods or the value thereof, and the
supreme cou-- today upheld that judg-
nlent.
The Judgment Of the Shawnee court
a srvarding damages to Stella B. Mar2Ia
from the Topeka Street Railway com
pany for the death of her husband in
North Topeka about a year ago was
sustained today by the supreme court.
The court held, in its decision, that a
pedestrian who crosses the tracks of A
street car line on a busy street cannot
he charged with contributory negli-
gence if he fs killed by a car. In this
case Marble crossed safely in front of
one car and was struck By another car
coming from behind the first car but
running on another track. The evidence
was conflicting regarding the fact OF
whether or not the motorman sounded
his gong or whether he was running