The new North-west., 1888-10-26
THE "oR1G1NAL AFFAIR.


complaint filed In suit in the District Court
here by Mr.. r. $. Jones and Mrs. r. s.
Jones (formerly Mrs. Mamie 81. Rogers,
widow of John 81. Rogers), in 1877, against
Clark & Larabie, alleging false representa-
tions in obtaining from her the dover inter-
est she held as widow Of Mr.. Rogers in the
"Original" quartz lode, At Butte, and claim.
ing 100000 damages, which it is stated has
since been paid. The estate of Mr.. Rogers,
it appears, owed the First National Bank Of
Helena q large sum of money, and 1t direct
ed Granville Stuart, Esq, to bid on the
"Orieinal" lode at the administrators sale,
but he was offered $500 by Clark &
Larabie, who also held . claim against Mr..
Rogers, to not bid, and accepted 1t. The
Record article exonerates MIR. Stuart for &C.
cepting it, saying be did so in the interest of
his employees, and turned over the money to
the First National. Mr.. r. S. Kelley, in q
communication to the Independent, Oct.
23d, 1883, says he and Ell. e. Irwin, and
others did bid on the property all they
thought it was worth, and that Messrs.
Stuart and Larabie, after he had quit
bidding, importuned him to continue
bidding, 80 that the estate was not loser by
Mr.. Stuart's withdrawal as bidder. He
further says the quartz mines in Butte At
that time were not sufficiently developed to
make them of great value, and that he learn
ed after considerable expenditure on the
mine and it had developed to be valuable,
Clark & Larabie not only paid the widow an
additional sum, but credited the estate (which
was insolvent, with considerable sum.
w. E. Cullen, Esq, who with Col. w. F..
Sanders and E. w. and j. K. Toole, were
the attorneys for Mr.. aud Mrs. Rogers in
the suit mentioned, in letter to the hide.
pendent dated October Esd, 1852, claims no
wrong was intended by Mr.. Stuart or Mr..
Larabie, and that the Probate Court con-
firmed the sale. He says Mr.. Stuart has
since informed him Mr.. Larabie paid more
than be would have paid for the property,
but adds, Mr.. Clark subsequently, after the
"Original" had been developed, was advised
by Hon. Jere. Black that the transaction be.
tween Messrs. Stuart and Larabie might de.
feat the title, and that Mr.. Clark then made
q fair settlement, but not as much as the
complainants claimed. This suit Mr.. Cul-
len says was brought at the instance Of the
First National Bank of Helena to recover
from Clark & Larabie and make good the
money it had loaned Mr.. Rogers, and that
Mrs. Rogers was willing to assist the bank
by allowing the use of her name for the
recovery of the property.
The grave allegation in the complaint is,
however, not as to the public sale, but that
subsequently the defendants, by misrepre-
sentation, secured from her for $3.50, her
dover interest in the said claim. The com.
plant alleges that Geo. w. Irwin, who had
been the administrator, was the managing
agent of her property; that on proposition
being made to pay her $3.50 for the same she
declined to sell unless Mr.. Irwin should ad
wise her to; tllat it was represented to her
that Mr.. Irwin had advised her to sell the
said dover right for the said sum of $3.50,
and that he had so written letter for her
advice and information. She thereupon
decided her do yer right for $3.50, and alleges
IN her complaint that she subsequently
ascertained Mr.. Irwin never gave such advice
or wrote such letter, aud that the property
was of great value.
Now, this is merely an allegation Of the
complaint. We believe the case never came
to trial, but was settled by stipulation, and
the evidence therefore bearing on it was
never brought out; nor do we know the facts
of the case. We are very reluctant to be-
lieve anything against the business integrity
of Mr.. Clark, and cannot but believe this
allegation susceptible Of q statement and
proof from him and others that will entirely
clear it. But 1t has entered into the cam.
paign, just as did certain charges against the
business character of Mr.. Carter while pub.
lie administrator, and which he felt called
upon to, and did, promptly meet and dispel.
Mrs. Jones is q resident of Butte. Mr.. Geo.
w. Irwin, who is not, as the Miner would
have believe, in any way implicated or dis.
parsged by the complaint, but whose evil
dence would be valuable, is unfortunately
absent from the Territory; but MI. Clark
doubtless can and will state the case salts
factorily, and it seems proper that he should
do so at once.