June 26, 1913

Prosecuting Attorney E.E. Kelly today submitted the following vigorous retort to the printed contentions of his predecessor, B.F. Mulkey, anent the Mrs. Clay insanity hearing:

Editor Mail Tribune:

Mr. Mulkey's further contribution to the Clay hearing, published in the Morning Sun, fails to explain his reason for injecting himself into this case and by cheap innuendo, criticizing public officials in discharge of a most unpleasant duty.

Replying to Mulkey's personal allusion that I have muddled the procedure in this case, I will say there has been no muddled procedure in this office since the sixth of January. That the complaint filed against Mrs. Clay was in all respects regular and that upon the evidence adduced she was properly committed to the proper institution, but that the office of the district attorney has no power or disposition to suspend the right of appeal.

I submit that Mr. Mulkey is not the most competent individual to pass upon technical legal procedure and that if he were, in view of the number of criminals that escaped trial through his muddled indictments while in the office of district attorney, he ought to maintain a most discreet silence on that subject.

The fact remains that Mr. Mulkey after publicly declaring that the action of this office should be directed against Mrs. Clay, and after furnishing reasons for such action, either through cowardice or carping littleness attempts to evade his share of the responsibility therefore and to discredit the action of this office and the county court.

Mr. Mulkey need have no fear of being shot, there is nothing about him that anyone but the most expert marksman could hit, save possibly his conceit, and a few punctures in that would be no great public calamity.


Share This Story