The daily intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Territory [i.e. Wash.]) 1876-1881, 1880-11-28
Sunday, Nov. IS, 1880.
THE YESLER-COLMAN CONTko-
VEHSf.
Gard from Mr. CoIman--OGer to
Compromi e.
Ma. HENRY L. YEsLER:

SIR:-Your communication through
the columns Of the city newspapers has
been duly considered. Since you seem
TO challenge public discussion Of the
merits Of our controversy. | am willing
that oil the facts should be made known.
and that public censure should rest
who're 1t belongs; but ! shall no. BELT
tie myself by returning your abuse IN
kind.
In the first place this whole trouble
has grown out of your efforts TO compel
ma to fulfill q contract on my part
which You are confessedly and notori-
ously unable to fulfill on your part. as
the records Of the Court in this case
clearly prove. The terms Of the con
tract are stated so plainly that there
can be no Misunderstanding or honest
difference OF opinion as TO their mean-
ing. They are that ! should receive
from you "a good and sufficient deed
to the sawmill property, and par for
the same $45 900. with interest. That
contract have always been willing to
fulfil, and would now pay you the last
cent OF the Sfj. 900 aud interest thereon
at the rate agreed upon. and 10 add
ton all the costs of this litigation. for
valid deed to the property. Such
deed it is not and never has been In
your power to give, and for that reason
You have no moral or legal right to
extort FROM me any part OF the purchase
money.
In the second place il is not true
that have ever refused To- retarn the
property to you. or pay for the use OF
II. The record in this case shows that
until you commenced this litigation |
paid you monthly such sums as the
times and my circumstances would
permit, and that have offered TO re-
turn the property to You and 70 pay
all that the use Of II WAS reasonably
worth.
Thirdly. you have never made me an
offer of compromise or settlement, ex-
sept Of the jug-handie extortipnate
kind, like the one you now Diake VITA
au air of condescenslon and maguan-
unity truly reffeshing Your proposal
is to retain the mill property. which
you valued at the tine we male the
contract at $40 600, the mill which has
since been destroyed. you now vplft at
$40. 900 IN fact better mill could be
built for $ij .000l leaving the property
nt present worth at last $4,000. &c
corning TO your own hguie'.
You also retain the brick corner and
other property SIZED on execution.
worth at least $50 900. AMI yuu ask in
addition $50 coo. making IA all 500
900, or S20.0 600 moro than the total
amount Of the judgment against .ii,e, ,
with interest and costs. Such gener-
osity | must resps, fully decline, But
for the peace of .he community and to
save my friends further annoyance.
now oiIer you as compromise better
settlement than you can possibly get
by continued litigation. | make two
offers. First. To pay $50 900 and oil
costs OF litigation mp to the present
time. upon your restoring To mo all the
property you have seized. or. second
TO pay So, 200 aud all the costs and
you retain tho mill property, upon
Your returning oil the other property to
me.
In view Of the fact that the onlS
great fire that ever occurred in this
town. a9d by the means of which the
mill was destroyed. originated in one
Of the shanties under your control, and
that you have for long time persisted
in forcing me to take the mill property
aud pay for it. you cannot consistently
or reasonably refuse to give me this
mill property on the ground that your
property will DO thereby exposed to
danger of fire.
You say you are willing to discount
your Judgment $l0.slS. The total oil
your judgment and interes, Is $40, 900
l now offer you 100000 aud costs OF
court. This proposition is Ssls more
than you say you are willing to accept
J. NJ. CoLMAN.
Seattle. Nov. q, 1880.