Lexington weekly intelligencer. (Lexington, Mo.) 1871-1887, 1880-04-17

|
nal and uuen the order of whom, or q r
,aioritv of them, such additional mar |
in shall be paid and refunded by the I
.cretary.
Defendant further testified that in his s
with plaintiff, plaintiff new
r, at auy time, until in May, 1873, de-
handed or asked of him either money,
ote or other security as margin to pro
sct himself against loss on account OF
nv decline or anticipated decline in the
,arket price of grain, or for other pur-
oses; that the defendant had not been
n St. Louis since January, 1877, and
hen was only passing through from
arkansas; was there only some three or
our hours called at plaintiff 8 office to
,orrsw S25 to get home on ;had no other
business with him, and no talk OF any
,ther business; that in May, about the
9th, 1878, plaintiff sent him the one
thousand dollar note sued on Tor his sig
nature; that wheat was then declining,
md he understood it was tor margin on
he wheat then bought for the July mar
let; and he signed and gave that note
or that purpose, as security Tor PLAIN
,iff, against loss ON that July wheat;
hat after this the plaintiff bought more
wheat for the July market, and wheat
still declining, and on plaintiffs de-
mand by letter, he gave and sent, Tor
,he same purpose, the acceptance for
hundred dollars, and the
note tor fifteen hundred dollars that for
these notes and acceptances he has new
er had or received any consideration OF
the value of one dollar; that the last
purchase OF wheat made by plaintiff Tor
defendant was made on the - DAY OF
May, 1878, and which was Tor the July
market. and made up the aggregate of
July wheat, forty five thousand bushels
that on the 9th of May. 1878, the wit
ness Seymour came to see defendant at
Aullville. in Lafayette county; he SAID
plaintiff had sent him to make some set
tlement with defendant, and brought
with him copies of the notes and accep-
tances spoken of by said plaintiff; want
ed more for margin, and wanted, also,a
mortgage on defendants farm, and 1t
defendant would do nothing to settle it.
plaintiff would sue. Defendant told
Sey ymeur that plaintiff had told him that
all he wanted was five cents bushel Tor
margin, and he had given his notes and
acceptances tor more than that. and
these plaintiff had; and they were not
due, and he declined and refused to put
up any further margin, or to give any
mortgage, or to make any settlement:
Seymour stayed two or three days, and
before he lett defendant told him his
neighbors believed it was all gambling
transactions; and he might tell plaintiff
that he washed his hands OF 1t, and
would have nothing more to do with 1t
aud plaintiff could do as he pleased witt
| it
This is not intended to be full state
ment of defendant Harrlson's evidence
nor do 1 intend to give a full statemen
of the evidence of other witnesses, bu
to show only so much and such parts o
the evidence as may consider necessa
ry to right understanding of the cas-
and the rulings Of the court.
DIR. M. T. Hartman, nephew OF de
fendant, testified that defendant make
witnesses Office, in Aullville. his head
quarters, and often called on him t
write his letters and do other wrltin
for him; says plaintiffs letter of tn
29th OF April, 1873, enclosing plaintiff
account with defendant. he thinks wa
received by defendant, at Aullville, o
the 3Oth, the next day after its date
that defendant on receiving 1t showed
to him; witness and he read it; defer
dant seemed uneasy and alarmed by i
and requested him, witness, to write a
answer to it; that he did write an al
swer in defendants name, defenda'
debating it, about to this effect. tn;
plaintiff letter of the 29th had been II
ceived; that he, defendant. was uneas
about the amount OF business they ha
been doing, and requesting plaintiff
write him and explain how it was don
and all about it. This, he thinks, WI
written by him ON the day plaintiff s le
ter of the 29th was received; knows q
= tendant asked him to write it on tn
- day, and thinks it was in day or tV
= atterward that defendant received fro
:. plaintiff reply by letter, which W
y ness thinks he himself took from the
! flee; took it to defendant; that 1T W
J. opened in witness presence, and CO
- tanned the two sample contracts used
: evidence; says he cannot give the wor
- of the letter, but remembers the su
" stance, which was about this, acknev
edged receipt OF defendants letter
inquiry said he enclosed sample &C
l. tracts, which would show how the pla
- tiff was required to do business by t
!, II rules OF the Merchants Exchange; a
to f., then he also SAINT copy OF the rules
" ~ regulations of the Merchants Exchane
r. said that no wheat was expected to
~ delivered, nor was it to be paid for;
10 that was necessary was to settle lor
q. ~ ferences in buying and selling prlc
nc Beng questioned about dates was C.
~, tident this letter was received about
-, first OF May; was sure 1t was not la
h than the Sd of May.
IT, Witness w. E. Keller said that he
i'd been in the drug business in Aullvl
he but had gone on a farm five or six m
" in the country from Aullville /; that alb
in the last OF April OF in the first days
IL May, his business made 1t necessary
it him to be IN Aullville three or four d;
lch and while he was in there on some
ed of those days defendant showed hin
at letter fren the plaintiff, Alexander i;
the exact date OF the letter he cannot
ase member; he gives the contents
ice the letter about to the 81
is effect as did DR.. Hartman; said
ice was clear in his memory OF
rp. substance Of the letter, and fur
her as to dates, says he is certain it wa
,all the first week OF May and thinks IN
as fore part OF the week, as he was I
ust to make up an inventory, and is c.
dent it was while he was there att
nav ing to that business.
the Craig Alexander the plaintiff, te
be ed, that as commission merchant
call St. Louis, he had done business for
inst lendant Tor about ten years, that u
be the tall of 1877. he had only rece
tual and sold for defendant, farm pro
old. and stock as he might send to him
re- that purpose that IN the tall OF 1S7
lay. commenced the business Of buying
:, or selling grain, wheat and corn, as
/. by fendant from time to time gave or
q, it that these last named transactions
ilng OF the same nature and cnaracte
ten these involved in this suit and on
con- he made tor plaintiff profits, from
rket to time which he paid to plaintiff
call one time fifty dollars, at another
} fill hundred dollars, and another one
day dred dollars, and tor which payi
.ren- he produced vouchers and that
lie at profit of one hundred and fifty six
e OF lars, as shown by his letter OF
and April 1878, was also another OF
ider- profits; that he did not Oh any OF
erred transactions require defendant t,
neIu- up or furnish margin Tor SEE
or in against loss and never did until
d OF 1873, when the notes and accept
and sued on were given tor that pu
shall Says he made no contract with d.
ed ia ant cOnceIninp iheSp TRANSACTION