Wood River times. [volume] (Hailey, Idaho) 1882-1915, 1882-10-03

"NOrth Star mine, large credit with
out security, while others were OBJ
tanning security membranes on his
property and extending such credits
while he was further incumbering his
property, with their knowledge. but
it is not shown that they, ut any time,
pressed him for the amount due
them. During the spring and sum
mer Of 1881, and up to Sept. 18th 1881,
they aided him in his Humorous but
abortive efforts to sell the property,
ms we'll as in borrowing the SO. 900
from Mccormick, tor which purpose de.
tendant Clohecy, for accommodation.
made himself personally liable on
the note, and furthermore made him.
self liable by guaranty for portion
OF said loan in order to obtain the
funds to enable Jaikowski to pay the
lien OF Pinkham l. Leonard, pending
the delay in securing the requisite
title papers to Mccormick.
NNVI. A large proportion of the
testimony in the trial was directed
to the value Of the two mines, but
this is really no issue in the plead
ings as to their value at the date Of
the transfer to Swift, the time at
which, II Mt all material, it was peril
nent to inquire. The complaint al
lodges that said two mines were of
tae value Of $l0O.OOO at the date of
the commencement of this action,
Dec. Sd 1881 and that two thirds
OF the ore on the dump was then of
more than value enough to pay off
all the Indebtedness to McComb and
and to j. O.Swift NCo. The owner de.
MES that said mines were then OF the
value OF $lOO, 900, and that they were
not of sufficient value on or before
Dec. 7th 1881 to enable Ja;kowski to
effect a repurchase of two, thirds
thereof at the price stipulated in the
bond.
There is no class ofproperty in this
country which is subject to such sud.
den and wide fluctuations of value as
mining claims, and none on which
the estimates Of men differ so wide
" as undeveloped mines, and this
fact has been illustrated by the evi
dence in this case. Estimated as
high as 100000 in the early stage OF
development, by Jaikowski and the
plaintiff, these mines were examined
by several parties. and in their re.
ports in 1881, p:ior to Sept, with u
view OF purchase, none Of them esti
mated them as worth more than $50.
600, and a majority regarded them
more unfavorably. All of Jaikowski's
negotiations for a sale on Wood River
had failed and he had also failed to
effect sale ut Salt Lake City to
any OF severa. parties with whom he
negotiated in Sept. 1881. one OF them
declining topurchase his interest at
$4,000.
The expert who examined these
mines at date nearest to September
18th, 1891, testified that he had advised
defendant Swift that he could safely
give $4,000 for the property on
speculative purchase, and might 90 as
high as $4,000 for the whole pro-
perty, though there was then not $500
worth of ore in sight in the mine.
he plaintiff testified that he neoo-
tiated the sale from Jaikowski to his
yrantor Shaeifer on the 10th Of Octo.
Der, 1881, the consideration being a
debt or account of $432 or 1852 for
Deer and wine due Shaeifer, and some
small sums Of money (not included
n the amount on the books and the /
amount not stately before that time ,,
oaned by Shaeffer.
From all the evidence it is reason
lble conclusion that Jaikowski's in
crest in the property on the 7th of
September, 1881, was not worth more
han 81 900 to $4,000, and no pre-
umption arises on this ground that
he transaction was a mortgage and
lot deed.
XVII. Soon after the 9TH of Sep. :
ember, 1881, Swift wrote to his part
Ter at kctchum to send man to the
mines to take possession Of the pro.
,eIty, and he took possession, under
he deed, in September or October, G
S8l, and has continued in possession
yer since.
XVIII. The promissory note of
aikowski to Mccormick Tor rather
ayable 10 Clohecy and by him in s
orsed to McCornick) was negotiated
nd delivered by him, through his agent
Tho was authorized to negotiate the
'an, at Salt Lake City, in the Terri
Dry Of Utah, and was by its terms,
ayable there. The statutes of that n
'erritory provide that interest may be o
objected at the rate Of ten QO) per ..
ent. per annum when parties have
OF agreed upon q different rate,
therwise parties are allowed to stipu- =
lte any rate of interest without statu-
Dry restriction.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW.
AS conclusions of law arising upon