The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1896-11-28
witness to sign the following bogus
contract for the sale of a mine:

contract for the sale of a mine:
This agreement, made and entered into
| this 9Th day of April, A D., 1884, by and
! between Joseph r. Norris the party of
the hrst part, and NJ. A. Hayken, the
party OF the second part:
Wltnesseth: That for and in consider
alton OF the sum of $1,000, one dollar of
which is in hand paid by the said second
| whereof is hereby Acknowledged, and
the balance of which consideration, viz:
S9'SSS, 10 be paid at such time and upon
the the conditions hereinafter named.
presents binds himself to convey to the
sara second party or 10 his heirs or as
signs, by the usual miners quit claim
Geeo, full one-haf interest in and TO
the Francis lode mining claim, the patent
number being -; also a full twenty
five thirty-seconds (25-30 interest or parts
IN and to the Holland and Black Warrior
lode mining claims. all of which are
situated in the Dugway mining district,
Tooeie county, Utah territory. That in
considerat ton of the transfer of such
properties the second party agrees to
pay 10 the party of the first part on or
before July 1, 1894, the sum of $1,000; on
or before December l, 1894, the sum OF
$500, and the balance of such purchase
price. viz: S2,499 shall not become due
and payable until such time as the first
party shall prosecute to patent the said
Holland and Black Warrior claims; and
for such purpose the said first party shall
be given until December 81, 1885 If at
such date all necessary proofs shall have
been made the receivers receipt secured
and the said first party in position to so
convey the interest named in said Holland
and Black Warrior claims and does so
convey the same in conformity TO the
stipulations of this instrument, then the
second party shall pay to the party of
the first part the said balance of 2,499.
If, however, the first party fails or
neglects to secure a United States patent
for the said Holland and Black Warrior
claims the second party may elect to con-
slider this agreement void and of no eff
feet in so far as it relates to the Dur-
chase and transfer of said claims, and
shall be under no obligation to pay TO
the first party the said sum OF y, 499 but
thereupon, to-wit, on the 3ist day OF De- !
cember 1885, the first party shall make |
and execute to the second party good !
and sufficient miners quit claim deed for /
the fun one-half interest in and TO the |
said Francis mining claim hereinabove |
described.
Be It further understood and agreed |
that time IS of the essence of this con-
tract and q failure to perform any of |
specified, shall work forfeiture hereof /
at the election of either of the parties
hereto.
Witness our hands the day and year
II 81 iie' ei'''''''e JOSEPH r. MORRIS,
NJ. A HAYKEN.
Witness then denied that he ever !
bought any mine from Morris or any I
body else. or ever paid Morris any
money except as bride. The con-
tract was simply ruse to be used in
defense of Morris and to make 1t ap-
pear that the $1,000 was paid on ac-
count of the mine. They had gone to
Mr. Adams office in Chicago to consult
him as a lawyer about the contract.
UNDER CROSS FIRE.
This was the substance of Mr.. Hay
kens direct testimony, and then he
was taken in hand by Judge Powers
in cross examination, but was handled
very mildly in comparison with the
cross examination he had to stand at
the last trial. His former answers in
examination and cross examination
were read to him and he was asked to
explain discrepancies of a more or less
grave character.
What time did you have the first
ak with Morris about the percent
lge?'' asked Judge Powers.
Il think as early as January"
How many indictments were found
against. your"
Ten, I think"
'One was tried and the jury dis
agreed. You consented to testify in
he case and other indictments were
dismissed? ?"
Yes, I understand So"
Did you talk about the percentage
With anybody else but Morris?''
No; only Norris
When did you finally agree about
he percentage"
IN March, l think"
Did you not talk with Bamberger
md Cahoon about it?"
No; the arrangement was made
With Morris only"
Judge Powers here read other por-
ions Of the testimony given by Hay
zen at the previous trial of Morris in
lay last, and asked him if he remem-
,ered giving the answers read, and
witness said he did in every case. !
You had figured up the 20 per cent
With Morris before you figured up the .
rice of the furniture at the regular
ates?"
Yes, but there were lots of changes
made afterward."
But you had figured up the general :
ost with Morris and included the 20 ,,
er cent?"
Yes" ;