The News-Herald. [volume] (Hillsboro, Highland Co., Ohio) 1886-1973, 1889-09-26

alLL0DOnVSFOs -
next evening At my hsuss, snd that in the
meantime Mr.. Campbell should prepare
. written agreement.
The next evening we met, and by my in
vitation Mr.. John A. Clarke, member Of
the bar OF this court. and my attorney, was
present. The subject was again discussed,
and It was perfectly well uidsrstood that
thd whole purpose Of the arrangement and
agreement was to enable Mr. Hughes to
make sale of the property and business to
English parties or an EnSlish syndicate.
The contract was then signed BY me, and
Afterwards by my wife, who was at that
time III in bed. supposed at the time the
price was to receive for the property was
fair. but It was most unfair according to the
estimate put upon the property in the En-
glish markets; The price for which Mr..
Hughes sold the property In London was
a141, 900, or about 4700, 900, a. win be seen
by the prospectus hereinafter mentioned.
The agreement was hurriedly read by Mr..
Campbell, and was not examined by me or
Mr. Clarke had confidence in Mr..
Campbell, who drew IL and who profsssed
to be my friend, and supposed he would
prorsct my interests.
Az the paper was originally drawn II
named eS50, 900 - the purchase money com
ing to me, and In this condition the paper
was signed. Immediately altar the paper
was signed Mr. Campbell took me aside and
insisted that should sign written promise
which hs had prepared, and By which was
to pay him S100, 900 Of the purchase money.
This paper I positively refused to sign,
though importuned TO do 20 that night and
the next morning by Mr.. Campbsll and Mr..
Hughes The ground Of my refusal was that
I would not bs party to any dsception Of
the English purchasers a. to The amount to
the amount TO be paid to ma Mr.. Clarke
coucurred with me. The result was that next
day the paper signed was destroyed and q
new agreement stating the purchase money
according to the truth was signed by the
parties, that Il by myself and wife and Mr.
Hughes. I cannot admit that what purports
to be copy Of this agreement y such, and
call for the original. 80 far a. recollect
the paper served in such copy. When this
paper was signed Mr.. Campbell re-
auirsd that should give him q
written promise to pay him out Of
the purchase money coming 10 me o26.-
900. This I did, and he now holds the
promise.
Ihavs had several interviews with Mr..
Campbell, but in no one Of them has It been
pretended that the said Hughes was to buy,
or had bought, In his own behalf, or that bis
relation to the property was other than that
Of a mere medium or trustee through whom
the English company was to acquire the
property. In one Of these interviews, which
occurred on the 10th Of April, at the Bank
Of Washington, Mr.. Campbell stated that
the credit Of three years, fixed by the agree
ment for the debentures and deed Of TRUST to
run, was objected to by the English parties
as too short, and he proposed to extend the
credit to ten years t
At no time since the said sale has there
been any application BY said Campbsll to
me, or any act or declaration on biz part
known to me save In fdrthsranos Of the said
contract Of sale 10 the English partieag The
said English company has alons snos the
said contract Of sale claimed, and now
claims, the right to said properly, and this
claim had been supported to the extent Of
their power BY the said Hughes and Camp
bsll, who seek In SSality, a. bslisvs, not
the property, but tho sxtrsvagant amount
to Be paid therefor to the former BY the En-
glish company II tho latter shall acquire the
property.
I have rad the aa,lAvis Of james 3.
Campbell filed In this cause say the an
davit IL calculated b mislkAd because, whilst
not dsnying, u carefully suppresses ~ real
character OF the transaction between myself
and Mr.. Hughes, which b cot forth In this
affidavit and that Of Mr.. Clarke m
Apart from this the said sfldavit
il, in many OF hs statements, inac-
curate. It b utterly untrue that on
the 10th Of April was notified
by said Campbell that Hughes would carry
out the agreement, and would require from
me the conveyance as stated on Page g. I
recollect the interview. It was at the
Bank Of Washington. What Campbsll said
was that the English parties would probably
buy, and to that responded "Ail right" "
1t Is further untrue that on the 9Th Of May
agreed to take my abstracts Of title to 1r.
Clarke to b completed for "Mr. Hughes, y
II BY this statement (vague, like ihost Of the
others Il meant that knew Hughes had be-
come the purchaser.
II IL not true that the profits are as stated
BY said Campbsll or that am depreciating
said prof1ts
In conclusion, I say that the appointment
Of q receiver would be absolutely ruinous to
the interest Of all parties concerned. The
business have built up would be necessar-
lily destroyed, to the great injury Of myself
and also Of my iadvsrsaries, II they have the
interest in the property which they falsely
ret up and pretend, and without any possi-
bic advantage to anybody concerned In the
property. believe the motion for q re-
oeiver is made by my adversaries for the
purpose Of coercion. ALBERT CARRY.
Subscribed and sworn to before me this
5th day Of July, 1889. R. J. MICS, Clerk.
BY NJ. A CLANCY, Assistant Clerk.
A true copy: Attest: r. ]. MEIGs, Clerk.
By L. P. WILLIAMS, Assistant Clerk.
In this connection the following ex-
tracts from the affidavit Of the brewers
lawyer duly sworn to and subscribed
July 8, 1889. and fled with the court
papers in the above cause will be of in
terest as corroborating the testimony of
Mr.. Garry: