The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1896-02-07

lon bank, and II was understood that
Mr.. White should make a sale of the
property to one Philip ShcnOn and
contract for the sale was entered into
with Shenon for 81 ,GG6.67. to be paid to
Gallagher in instalments. While
the contract was in fun force. Gallagher
alleges, Mr. White, without power or
authority, had expressly been refused,
entered into another contract with
Shenon whereby he agreed to sell him
the property for the reduced price of
$4,000, which act, Gallagher says, who re-
pudiated and then revoked the power
of attorney on Jan. II, 1894 on Dec. 10,
1892, he gave note to Mr.. White for
$4,000, secured by a mortgage on the
mining property mentioned in the sec
ond suit.
The bank alleges that the note was
assigned and transferred by Mr. White,
but Gallagher claims that the bank
never had lawful possession of the
note. He also set up that he had never
been financially able to pay the note
except by the sale of the mortga gcd
property. He says that on Dec. 2S, 1894,
Mr.. White and the bank with fraudu-
lent intent to take undue advantage of
his financial condition and 10 dofraud
him of his rights and interests in the
mining properties mentioned, and to
acquire them for the bank at a grossly
agreed that Mr.. White should fraudu-
lcntly act under the power OF attorney
and convey GaliCher's interests in the
mining claims for q pretended consid-
GRAFTON OF $4,000 and that such consid-
Grafton should he endorsed on the note
as a payment thereon.
In pursuance of that agreement "a
deed was executed to the bank by Mr.
White and the $1,000 endorsed on the
note, though the consideration was
never paid To Gallagher or any other
person. Gallagher says Mr.. White well
knew that the property was fully worth
the price mentioned IN the contract
with Shenon. He never approved or
confirmed the pretended sale and as
soon as he learned of II he expressly
disapproved il and refused TO be bound
by the transaction. After the sa Ie the
bank took possession Of the property
and has mined and disposed Of large
Quantities of ore to the great damage
and injury of the defendant
Gallagher I'm his plcadings, saws ne
recognizes that he is without remedy
by the strict rules Of the common law.
and that his only hope Of relief IS
through court Of equity. He asked
that the bank be perpetuany enioined
from further prosecuting its action
against him and that the deed Of con-
Ncyance from White to the bank be de-
bank 10 required 70 give an account
ing OF the ore taken from tho mines. In
his defense 10 the suit for the forcclos-
'rc OF tho mortgage he claims that the
u.t" was not assigned To the bank for
a valuable Considora ton and that the
bank is not the lawful holder Of the
note. lie also repeats his charges Of
fraud between the bank and Mr.. White
Tho bank. of course. denies those broad
charges Of fraud. J. s. Shropshire rep
resented the bank at the hearing yes
terday, ana Judge DeWolfe appeared
for the defendant. The testimony I'm
the case had been taken by a referee
and was very voluminous
The arguments took up nearly all
day and at their conclusion Judge
Knowles decided the first case in favor
of Gallagher and ordered the sale set
asid" and he deed Cancelled. In the
SECOND ease. the suit for the f0reclos-
IRE of the mort gag e, the plaintiff was
given 20 days in which to file supple
mental bill and include In the PRAYER n
plea for the endorsement on the note
or the $4,000 mentioned in the case
The 100000 damage suit Of T. Nc
Andrews against the Oregon Short
Line was continued for trial until Feb.
10. owing to the fact that the COM
pany.s attorney is required 10 go 10
san Francisco 10 argue the appeal i'm
the Frost damage suit.
The demurrer in the damage suit of |
Michael Eagan against the Great |
Northern Will be argued to-day.