The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1893-05-24
r0R A BIG AMOUNT.
r1aring of the Madison Mill
Suit Soon to Open.
1ecounTs OF YEARS INVOLVED.
r. ssywasd sned for eYzs ,ooe Dam
erss for syrise sisndcr-wetmose
weary Of . Guardian.

-. N the largest civil suits which have
-, sr,se!. On the North Pacific coast. in
-.svsns perhaps the largest sum sued for
!. sreos.ns. came NJ for trial yesterday in
8. rnited States circuit court. Il is the
su;s OF Dexter Horton 4 Co. vs.. W. r.
r.yx ard for $21s. - ~ on account. Owing
= the fact that Judge Hanford's brother.
r,.ak. 10 administrator Of one Of the
,e,,ses indirectly interested. Judge Charles
= ge.,inssr. reesntiy appointed TO sue-
- the late United States Judg. Deadly.
sxpcrsianA. 81. IN Judge Hanford's place.
- srs; il was expected TO try the case be-
fors iary. and u venire was drawn for
a. ruypcse, bat. it beng suggested that
,hs se,timony be taken before referee,
~ attorneys. after considerable conaulta-
ti,.n agreed that the case be referred 20 X.
r. ssrud wick. OF the Seattle bar. 70 take
the testimony and report his findings Of
fses and iaw 10 the eour: not later than
Jane J.
This case grows ont Of course OF deal
Ing between ". +. sayward and the late
ffu Of Harrington & Smith. In 1850
George 4. Meigs and the Mcigs Lumber
and Ship Building Company were the
owners Of . large amount OF property in
The territory Of Washington, including the
Port Madison mills. Meigs and the ship
building company being embarrassed con-
ycyed the property to Sayward, it being
hesyily encountered. Harrington & Smith
then commenced To furnish Sayward with
goods and supplies for the operation Of
the Port Madison mills, and also money
70 pay of judgments and tncumb-
Ysnces on the property. This course
Of dealings vas kept up until
1880, when Harrington a. Smith assigned
their claims 10 Dexter Horton & Co..
bankers. which firm on January I. io92.
commenced action in the superior court Of
King county IN recover against Sayward
3he sum OF SGT. 7ss s. upon one Of the as
signed claims. The case was removed to
the United states circuit court, and since
then the time has been consumed in set
ting the issues.
The contention now seems to be whether
Or not the account assigned TO the bank is
stated account. the plaintiff claiming
that IL Is and the defendant insisting that
4 - an open. current and running one, in
which he claims there are many illegal
charges against him. 1t appears that
daily and monthly statements we're sent
by Harrington 4 Smith to- A. Meigs, the
resident managing agent Of Sayward. who
has ~ all times been in charge of the Port
Madison mills. and all the items embraced
In the account between Harrington Il
Smith and Sayward were included in
monthly statements sent to Meigs as Say
wards agent The correctness OF an item
ixcd account not objected to within a rea-
sonable time becomes conceded. and hence
forth IL q stated account These state
ments. the plaintiff claims, were never OBJ
Jected TO, and being authorized in the first
Instance, became stated accounts. The de-
fendant claims that objections were made
from time To time to items in the account
which were never corrected, aud that
Therefore the account did not become stated,
and !, is also claimed by the defendant
that Meigs had no right as agent to pass
upon certain charges in the account. All
the property OF the Port Madison mills.
including about 200 acres of land. was
attached by tho plaintiff. and is still held
under the writ.
Other suits depending on the result Of
this action were Also continued. One OF
these ~ tnat OF r.. VI. IlerTtEu Va. VI. n.
Harrington and DE xter Horton 4 Co. in
which Herrich claims damages from Hair.
rington for assigning To pexser Horton &
Co. the large account which is the basis OF
the other action, Harrington & Smith
having made n contract with Herrieh to
furnish the Port Madison mill with sup
plies and sell the output of the mill, re
mbursing himself ont of the proceeds and
also gradually reducing the amount Of the
mills debt to Harrington & Smith, IL be-
Ing expressly stipulated that the latter
firm should not assign their account
against the mill.
After the referee makes his report June
3. three days will he allowed for the filing
of objections. and the hearing Of these
will he had on June q.
Quite an array of legal talent has been
employed In this contest. Hughes. Hast
ings 4 Stedman and Blame & pevries ap-
pearing for the bank aud the defense be-
lag represented by Judge II. +. Dennison,
Olympia. William Lair HUI. Battle a
shirsey and ]. Il. Howe.
LOST A HUSBAND THEREBr.