Page 1,
Pleas before Hon R T. Petree Circuit Judge at the Court House in Greenville Ky on the 24th day of November 1865.

Indictment Filed May 19^th 1860
Muhlenberg Circuit Court
May Term 1860.
The Commonwealth of Kentucky
against
William Kirtley Defendant

The Grand Jury of Muhlenberg County in the name and by the authority of the Commonwealth of Kentucky accuse William Kirtley of the Crime of Grand Larceny committed as follows to wit: The said William Kirtley on the 28^th day of February 1860 in the County aforesaid feloniously took and carried away the sum of Forty five dollars the personal property of John W. Dearing: of the value of more than four dollars Against the peace and dignity of the Commonwealth of Kentucky.

W. H. James
Foreman of Grand Jury
James B. Campbell
attorney for Comth,

Information given by
John W Dearing
Robert Burdine
Charles Seahly
D^r T. H. King.
W. G. Abbott,

On the back of said indictment is the following endorsement to wit "a true Bill, W H James"

Foreman of Grand Jury"

2
Also the following endorsement on said Indictment Viz: "Bench Warrant to issue on the within indictment admit to bail in the sum of two hundred dollars

Tho. C. Dabney."

Order of the Court reinstating case on docket

Muhlenberg Circuit Court
Nov^r. termNov 17, 1865.
The Commonwealth of Kentucky Plaintiff
against } ForGrandLarceny
William Kirtley Defendant

On motion of the attorney for the Commonwealth it is ordred by the Court that this prosecution be and the same is herby re-instated on the docket,

Muhlenberg Circuit Court
Nov term, Nov^r 18, 1865.
The Comth of Ky
vs } ForGrandLarceny
William Kirtley

It is ordered that this cause be set down for trial on the 9^th day of the present term, And the deft was brought into court & default of bail was remanded to Jail in the Custody of the Jailer, And a W. A. is awarded the Comth returnable to the 9^th day of the present term against D^r T. H. King, Cha^s Sely & W. G. Abbott as witnesses for the Comth permitting them to give bail in the sum of $100 each, for their appearance in this Court on the 9^th day of its present term And a subpeona is awarded against R. W. Bodine a witness for the Comth returnable the 9^th day of this term of Court,

3.
Verdict of Jury.

Muhlenberg Circuit Court
November termNov 22, 1865
The Commonwealth of Kentucky Plaintiff
against } For Grand Larceny
William Kirtley Defendant

This day came the Attorney for the Commonwealth and the defendant was brought to the bar in Custody of the Jailer and the defendant waived a formal arraignment and acknowledged the identity of his person and plead not guilty as charged in the indictment, Thereupon the following Jurors James M. Dennis, J. F. M. Brown, Thomas J. Eades, William H Metzker H. L. Hayes, G. M, Bibb, Green B. Williams, W P, Richardson, G, W, Blackwell, Jeremiah Langley, H. H. Johnston and Samuel B Lovell, were duly empannelled tried and sworn, and after having heard the evidence in the cause and arguments of counsel rendered the following verdict towit; "We of the jury find the defendant guilty as charged in the indictment and assess his punishment two years in the penitentiary of the state of Ky,

G. M. Bibb"

Thereupon the defendant was remanded to Jail to await the judgment and sentence of the Court —

4
order,

Muhlenberg Circuit Court.
November 23^d Nov^r term 1865.
The Commonwealth of Kentucky Plff.
vs
William Kirtley Deft

The defendant by his atty moved the Court to set aside the verdict of the jury and filed reasons for a new trial, which motion was overruled by the Court to which ruling of the Court the defendant, and prayed an appeal to the Court of Appeals which is granted. And the defendant by his attorney filed his bill of exceptions which being signed by the Court, is ordered to be filed and made part of the record.

reasons for new trial filed Nov. 23^d. 1865

Muhlenberg Circuit Court
The Commonwealth of Kentucky Plaintiff
against
William Kirtley Defendant

The defendant moved the court to set aside the verdict of the Jury in this prosecution and grant him a new trial,
1^st Because the verdict of the Jury is not supported by the evidence of the case.
2. Because the verdict of the jury is against the law and evidence.

page 5

Muhlenberg Circuit Court
The Commonwealth of Kentucky Plaintiff
against
William Kirtley Defendant

Be it remembered that upon the trial of this prosecution, John W. Dearing was called as a witness who being sworn testified as follows on the last day of February 1860 witness missed from his money drawer some money witness was a merchant residing at Paradise in Muhlenberg County Ky on the night the money was taken the accused William Kirtley was at witness Store with D^r King John Abbott & others, We were in the back room near the stove playing a game for amusement, Kirtley went out was absent 15 or 20 minutes & returned this was between seven & eight oclock P M, The front door of the store was open and no light in the front room, The Company dispersed about the same time, soon after they left witness found his money drawer open & missed therefrom $45 in bills one twenty dollar bill on the Southern Bank of Kentucky one Ten dollar bill on the Commerscial Bk and three five dollar bills he thinks on the Bank of Louisville. Witness was in the Store that night before the money was taken but does not remember that he left the money drawer open but it was not locked. It could have been open without going behind the Counter by getting on the Counter. he was in the habit of leaving his

6.
front door open in the early part of the night some times had a light in their & some times none, That night there was no light in front room Witness tod some persons that night of his loss, but did not tell Kirtley and said but little about it to any one, In three or four days after the loss of the money, William Kirtley returned to witness a Twenty dollar bill a ten dollar bill and two five dollar bills and four dollars in change & soon after sent one dollar by his brother Kirtley lived at that time in Paradise, 200 yards from Witness Store, not long after this occurred Kirtley left Paradise & was off teaching school He was also in the army as witness understood. His father lived in Paradise & he has been there often since & staid weeks & perhaps months at a time.

Being Cross examined Witness stated that when Kirtley returned the money he told witness that the drawer was open & that he took the money in order to caution him against carelessness intending to return it, that he had told his wife what he had done that he had got Charles Sely to change one of the five dollar bills that he had the money at his house & would go & bring it, which he did in a few minutes. The accused had been intimate with witness, much about his store & may sometimes have waited on his customers but he does not recollect distinctly as to this.

7
Witness had never accused Kirtley of taking the money before it was returned. He had stated in his presence the day after its loss, that he had lost the money from his vest pocket and Kirtley said it was a serious loss. On the night the money was returned Kirtley was in witness back room when Charles Sely came into the front room & showed witness a five dollar bill which he said he got from Kirtley. Sely bought some candles and left, Kirtley then asked witness to step out with him. They went out of the house to themselves & Kirtley told him about having taken the money as before stated & returned it to him in a few minutes thereafter. Kirtley has been in the habit of staying about Witness Store since when in Paradise. Kirtley had a wife who staid at his father's while he was absent in the Army.

King being also called as a witness for the Commonwealth stated, that he was in Dearing's store the night his money was said to have been taken W^m Kirtley & several other persons were there in back room. Think the front door was open & the door between the back & front room also The middle door was so situated that a person sitting by store in back room could not see one coming in at the front door, About 7 or 8 oclock Kirtley went out & returned in a few minutes, Three or four days after this he saw Charles Sely go

8.
into Dearing's Store & show him a five dollar bill. They held a conversation in a low tone Kirtely was in back room when Sely went in & witness thinks might have heard a part of what was said by Sely this was in day time. Kirtley has been absent from Paradise most of the time since, Witness heard he was teaching a school some where & that he was in the army but never saw him in the army nor with uniform on he has often been in and around Paradise since & staid perhaps weeks at a time & was there when he was arrested this fall

Charles Sely being called as a witness for the Commonwealth stated that two or three days after he had heard ^that^ Dearing had lost money Kirtley came to his house in Paradise bought some beer and gave him a five dollar bill for which he gave him the change. Witness took the bill that night to Dearing store & showed it to him. And this was all the evidence given in the case. After the argument was concluded the court delivered to the jury three written instructions as follows.

Comth vs Kirtley,

"The Court instruct the Jury if they believe from the evidence to the exclusion of all reasonable doubt, that the accused did before the finding of the indictment in the County of Muhlenberg feloniously

9
take and carry away Forty five dollars the money of John Dearing, as charged in the indictment and with the intent at the time of s^d taking and carrying away to convert the same to the defts own use, they should find him guilty and fix his punishment at confinement in the penitentiary of the state not less than two nor more than four years.

The Court further say, to the Jury that if they entertain a reasonable doubt of the guilt of the defendant growing out of all the evidence in the case they should acquit him.

R. T. Petree,

Further that the law presuming the innocense of the deft until he is proved to be guilty.

R. T. Petree

And these were all the instruction asked or given

R. T Petree

Muhlenberg Circuit Court
November 24, Nov^r. term 1865.
The Commonwealth of Kentucky Plaintiff
against } For Grand Larceny,
William Kirtley Defendant

The defendant was this day brought into Court and being informed of the nature of the indictment plea and verdict, was asked if he had any thing legal cause to show why judgment should

>10
not be pronounced against him, and none being shown, it is adjudged that the defendant to be taken, by the sheriff of Muhlenberg County to the state penitentiary, and then confined at hard labor for the period of two years,

State of Kentucky
Muhlenberg Circuit Court } Sct,

I Tho. J. Jones deputy for J. H Reno clerk of said Court do certify that the foregoing is a true copy from the record in said court in the case of the Commth of Ky against William Kirtley —

Witness my hand, this 29^th day of November 1865.

Tho. J. Jones D. C.
for J. H. Reno C, m, c, c,

{Revenue Stamp}

Muhlenburg Cir Ct
vs
Comth of Kentucky
vs } Copy of Record
William Kirtley
Nov term/65

fee $2.⁵⁰ c