Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1890-10-23

that AlJ lEtculLOu5 @ul uNslTe was To
nave his own decision as to the
value of his servict5. Confirmed /
wIthout controversy. That IN TINS
dealing with the court and the &
l,,sss fond the Receiver was guilty 4
~ = lack Il fidelity to his rust
and appreciation q his duty. 7,
TRefnsed for the reaso3 Mat the /
eaters contained in this proposed 4
6nJing have been passed upon and
d,,tsrmineJ by the decisions and de- /.
crees Of the Supreme Court rem
derrd on March 2, 1889. NJ. y.
stone. Commissioned.
III.
-,rh,, the instances ~ which The
said Receiver unfairly sister The
facts connected with the services Of
Inc mid Receiver are as follows, ref.
srcuce beln1 made to the report Of
ths examiner, r.. r. 5prague, fled
- him In this court on the 18th day
Of November, fNssi 100.
First-On page .. Wines Cffoes-
becg vas informed OF al astiTc p''r-
nit Of other property Throughout
salt Lace City, county, aud various
r.r,ft.y-,s sf this Territory, extend
ing over & coT-sidefaOls portion OF
the Territory, IN Tire way Of exam
ming real estate, exasfoi .e;ion Of
titIes in four or five different CON
tie-: inquiry and pursuit rs TO the
ll,gatiou u herbs Of stock In various
nsF,s ,f the Territory. Whereas,
~. f,et yssss that said Receiver made
M active yurseit u property over
any. considerable port1U- u the Ter
r;f1,v. that he did !. { exarzine zeal
e.tsfs. or titles 70 real estate, M shy
case. the said labor being performed
nv Inc attorney for the Receiver
That lie aid not inquire after or pur-
sue herds Of s,s.ck in any parts OF
the Territory.
REFUSED for the resrs5r that the
matters contained in this proposed
finding have been passed upon am
determined by the decisions anu
jecrees Of the superior court, rem
der-d On March p, 1883. N. y
stone. Commissioned
, ceeoud-Said Writers was also IN
formSt, 70 the institution Of come ten
or a dozen suits with his attorneys,
for the purpose OF s-sting aside s1les
Z of real estate and personal property
(, ~ Iar-e value, alleged 20 be ffaudu-
IsptIv transferred, etc, the fact Ce-
iur. that the Only labor performed
nv The Receiver in this regard was
t5e attendance for some five or SIX
DAVIS UPON an investigation heid oy
the United States Attorney BEFORE q
commissioner. n which he was
nrs,ent a part OF the time; but
he onlv --c-z done by the Receiver
WIS the making q formal demand
mon the defendants for property
Recovered in said examination, but
J TN. s,,it. themselves were brought
by mis- attorneys, who performed All
! the labor.
Thirt-Said witness was Informed
that said Receiver had given almost
continuous personal attention and
employnreat Of his time for period
az eleven months; and, as a result.
| OF these efforts, suits ami pursuit oil
p-cuert~, ne had obtained possession
Of real estate ard persOnal property
in addition tOtflat already delivered,
amounting in valtse to s5J950l0, or
l about that: the fact beiEg3 that there
! was not 4 continual PERSONAL Atten-
ton aad employment OF time y the
/ Receiver for a period Of eleven
[ months, nor for any considerable
tpartion OF that time; nor did he OBJ
| taiu possession of real and persona!
property TO the amount Of 500, 900,
as a result Of hi efforts, suits or FuF'
suit Of property, but, on the con,
trary, large portion Of said sum OF
/ $50. 900 was obtained as the direct
/ results of the efforts, exclusively OF
. the attorneys tor the Receiver, and
n large portion Of said sum, TO wit,
that represented by the 5000 sheer
and ST5, 900 in cash, was not the re-
suit Of any active pursuit or lab-rs
on the part Of the said Receiver, but
was the result Of a compromise ant
a voluntary surrender by the de
PENDANTS Of their property for the
purpose Of obtaining final decree
IN this action.
Refused for the reason that thu
matters contained in this propose
finding have been passed upon an,
determined by the decisions AM
DEGREES Of the Supreme Court zen
dered on March %, 1859. NJ. y
Stone, Commissioner.
| FOurth-Said witness was in
formed of the necessity Of sending
agents to different parts Of the Ter
ritOry, and some out Of the Terrific
", at the same time, and directing
their efforts and action, for the pur
pose Of receiving possession Of SONS
10000 head Of sheep, amongst oJhe
property, the fact being that In.
agent Of the said defendant corpora
ton had agreed in writing 10 uelive
into tine possession Of the Receive
| $1,000 sheep, and that the only efiOr
70 be made on the part Of the Recei
yer was to send parties to collect sal,
sheep. That the turning over O
said sheep was voluntary On the par
OF the sii defendants, and tina
there was no labor involved in III
reeting the efforts and action Of tn
agents Of said Receiver.
| E'ifth-The statement made {,
said witness GrOesbeck by the al
torney for the Receiver rs a state
ment OF the services rendered by To,
Receiver, found on pages . and 3 o
said report, is unfair and incomplete
IN that 1t fails 10 state that all the
work by way Of recovery Of persona
aud real property was done by tn,
attorneys for the Receiver, anl
that no efforts We're made for ;
period of six months after the 40
pOintment Of the Receiver looSins
toward the recovery OF n larg,
amount Of personal property be
lieved by the Receiver % be in tn,
hands Of agents for the defeudan
corporation; and that a claim Of thu
| United States against variou
parties, amounting 70 S25s, 900, hal
been compromised for the sum o
So, 090; and that in general a larg,
amount Of property held by tn,
Receiver was obtained by him from
the defendant corporation upon
voluntary surrender by it, for tn,
| purpose Of winding up the litigation
and Of obtaining a final decree {,
the Supreme Court OF the Unite,
States.
| Refused for the reason that tn
matters set forth in this propose,
finding have been determined b,
the decisions and DEGREES OF tn
Supreme Court rendered on Marcel
10Th, lSS9. NJ. y. Stone, Commits
] siOuer
Sixtii-UpOn page Of said report
the Receiver, testifying in his owl
behslf, states unfairly the service
rendered by him, by saying: =.
continued tn search for that prom
erty, here and there, using every
means within my power, employ
ing my deputy marshals Throughout
the Territory TO get information a
TO the whereabouts of property
etc, which proved very beneficial
TO me-" the fact being that he 81,
not cOntinue to search for other O
the property o; the defendant cor
poratiOn, nor did he use the mean
within his power, nor did he EN-
ploy his deputy marshals to get in
formation Is to the whereabouts o
Z