The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1896-08-30
John Beck Receivers Judgment
Against Him For SSo.oI3.
REFEREE GEO. SUTHERLAND
SCORES HYDE AND HIS METHODS
IN VERY STRONG TERMS.
An Old Couple Air Their Troubles in
the Divorce Court-John F. Byron
Needs More Proof to Secure a De-
cree-Albert Svveigert Found Gull
ty OF observation-disclosures orders
and Court Notes.

Referee George Sutherland Yesterday
filed his report in the suit for an ac-
counting brought by John Beck against
Alonzo E. Hyde. The findings are in
favor Of the plaintiff and directs the
entering of judgment in his behalf for
$80,913.63 and costs. The findings were
approved by the district court and judg-
ment entered accordingly.
Mr.. Sutherland found that on July s.
1889, the plaintiff appointed the defend
! ant, Hyde, his agent and attorney; in
fact to do all that he might in his
proper judgment deem necessary for the
interest of plaintiff in all financial mat
tiers in which Beck was engaged and
with full power to buy and sell stocks,
mines. real estate and collect and re-
cefve moneys due Beck from every per-
son. That after April /, 1893 and until
December 1, 1898, Hyde, while acting as
st-sh agent and attorney, disbursed
large sums of money arising from the
operation of mining and other property
of Beck. and that during all the period
of the agency the plaintiff trusted Hyde
fully and relied upon him TO keep ac-
count of his doings as such agent
GROSSLY MISBEHAVED.
But the defendant, disregarding his
duty in the premises grossly 1nisbe-
haved and mismanaged the affairs of
the plaintiff and neglected to keep any
proper books of account or any books
whatever, or any record of the financial
transactions carried on by himself on
account of Beck. and also neglected to
keep any record of the dealings be
tween plaintiff and defendant and re-
fused to render any statement of &C
counts to Beck and deceived him and
falsely represented to Beck that he,
Beck, was indebted to the defendant
and procured Beck to execute and de-
liver to him promissory notes for large
sums of money and to secure the same
by the deposit of collateral securities
which securities Hyde appropriated to
his own use; and while the defendant
was indebted TO plaintiff in a large
sum OF money, more han $4,000, the
defendant procured plaintiff to borrow
s., 100, which money the defendant ap-
propriated to his own use and after
wards permitted the plaintiff to be sued
and judgments to be taken out against
him, upon which execution was issued
and the personal property of the plain
tiff was sold to the value of not less
than $4,000 for less than $4,000; that
the defendant used his position as agent
and confidential adviser of plaintiff for
the furtherance of his own interests as
against the interest of the plaintiff, by
secretly purchasing shares of mining
stock while he was indebted to plain
tiff, and afterwards selling the same
stock to plaintiff for a price very large
ly in excess Of that paid by defendant
therefor.
USED BECKS MONEY.
The report also says that Hyde
converted to his own use large
sums of money belonging to the plain
tiff, including $1,000 received from James
Jack, and procured the plaintiff to pay
to divers persons interest on large sums
of money at an exorbitant rate at a
period when the defendant was indebt-
ed to plaintiff in sums largely in excess
of that borrowed by plaintiff, and Hyde
demanded from and received from the
plaintiff collateral security of a watch
and other personal property for pre-
tended loans made by defendant to
Beck, when defendant owed him more
than $4,000
Plaintiff at the same time was paying
Hyde $500 month for his services as
manager of the Bullion-Beck mine, and
made him valuable presents for special
services performed in procuring loans
for plaintiff, and also paid him as COM
pensation the sum of $4,000.
The referee finds that by reason of the
misdoings of Hyde he has not earned
nor is he entitled to receive from the
plaintiff any further compensation for
his services, and that the defends mt
is indebted to plaintiff at this date in
the sum of $50, 1883 over and above the
amount of all expenditures and dis
burSements made by defendant on be-
half of plaintiff.