Salt Lake evening Democrat. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1885-1887, 1885-03-17
SARAHS SUIT.
The Allegations of Miss Williams
Against Mr.. Edward Austin.

with the clerk of the District Court yes
terday morning, but service was not
made on the defendant till late IN the
afternoon. In brief, she complains as
follows:
That she first became acquainted with
said defendant and his wife on shipboard
while returning from Europe in 1880, and
that Austin was then coming to Salt Lake
City to manage the London Bank OF
Utah, an institution carriek on by Eng
lish capitalists.
Letters followed the acquaintance by
which plaintiff was led to believe that
Salt Lake City and vicinity afforded fay-
orable opportunities for the investment OF
money on loans at high rates of interest.
Relying upon the pretended friendship OF
the defendant, and confding in his hon
esty, candor and judgment in business
affairs, she did, between the 18th day of
May, 1881, and the 18th day of February,
1888, remit, and entrust to the said de-
PENDANT to be by him loaned upon mort
gage security, in the said Territory for
her use and benefit, divers sums of
money amounting in the aggregate to
more than 1900. There was afterwards
considerable sums of interest which had
accumulated upon the aforesaid moneys,
and belonging to the plaintiff, also divi-
dends upon stocks owned by, and pur-
chased for her by the said defendant with
her money, which interest and dividends
were collected by the defendant,
and by the plaintiff also entrusted to him
for investment in loans as aforesaid; de-
PENDANT was her confidential agent; she
only gave general directions.
Further, that the defendant made loans
at remunerative rates, and transmitted
frequent and satisfactory statements of
the account between himself and the
plaintiff On the 18th day of April the
defendant sent the plaintiff his own note
for 81, 800, bearing interest at 10 per cent.
per annum, payable one year from its
date, accompanied by 100 shares of stock
in the London Bank of Utah (limited) as
security.
Another loan to himself was made of
81 300, secured by stock of the Mammoth
Mining Company. Representations as to
the value of said stock were false and
fraudulent. In April, 1884, defendant re-
quested plaintiff to return the two notes
and security, promising to replace them
by mortgages on city property in her
favor. Plaintiff did so, accidentally re-
tanning 1850 shares OF Mammoth, but de-
PENDANT returned no equivalent.
Plaintiff further alleges that defendant
protested to have loaned 81 ,507. As to w.
H. Bowers, for which he had note, and
1,52S shares of Mammoth stock, said to
| be worth $4,000 That in mallins said
loan to said Bowers-if, in fact, it was
made-and in taking the said security,
the said defendant was grossly IMPROVE
dent, careless and negligent; that said
note has not been paid, and there is now
accrued and unpaid thereon a large
amount of interest, amounting to two
hundred dollars or more. If the loan
was made it was made for Austin's per-
sonal advantage, under the following
circumstances. That Bowers and Aus
tin were interested in the Mammoth
stock jobbing affair, and for that sole
reason Austin made the loan, and plain
tiff further, upon her information and
belief, alleges that the said defendant
never would, independent of the said
relations existing between himself and
Bowers, have made the said loan upon
the said security.
That under the management of Bowers
and H. A. Munro Butler-J tombstone, said
Mammoth Mine was worked without
profitable results; but that defendant in
a letter dated January, 1883, falsely gave
a glowing account of the richness of said
Mammoth Mine, its extensive refining
works and smelling furnaces, and repre-
senting that cit was going to pay SPLEEN
didly," that they were then turning out
$4,000 month. He further represented
that he had himself taken $500
shares as speculation, and gave
picture in the most gorgeous coloring
of the certainty OF making large profits
by investing in the stock of said COM
pany, adding with insignificant and i'm
pressive emphasis that the company did
its business with hin,-meaning as man.
ager of the said London bank-and that
he knetO Just what aUas being done; that
there were then but few thousand, out
of 100000 shares, for sale at $3.50 per
share, which would be the lowest they
would be sold for, and concluding with
an invitation to plaintiff to let him know
at once if she thought well of it.
Also that the superintendent of the Onta-
rio had purchased stock; that on these
representations she sanctioned the pur-
chose of 1000 shares, paying for them
So, $50. Plaintiff alleges that defendant
did not purchase the shares, but trans
ferred to her stock of his own, which he
had secured for a nominal amount.
And plaintiff further alleges, on her
information and belief, that the said stock |
had not at the said time any market
value; that there was not then and had |
not been for long time prior thereto, any
dealing in said stock, save among very