The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1898-12-30
Phelps Stokes Gives His Testimony
Against MI. FarnSworth.
RELATES A CONVERSATION
ALLEGED TO HAVE BEEN HAD
WITH THE DEFENDANT.
Farnsworth Said He Paid Sixty
Thousand Dollars For the Prop
erty, Acting For the Company,
and Stokes, sr., Gave Him That
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Bankrupt.

In the suit of the Nevada company
VS.. P. T. Farnsworth in the federal
court, the new witness introduced yes
terday was j. G. Phelps Stokes, son
of Arson Phelps Stokes. and president
of the Nevada company. His testimony
bore principally upon the alleged agree
ment of Mr.. Farnsworth to buy min
ing properties for the Nevada company
without any commission or profit, and
also to the amount alleged to lave been.
paid for the three properties in ques-
ton, which, according to the testimony,
Mr.. Farnsworth asserted was nearly
$780, 600. This amount, the witness stat
ed, was sent by Arson Phelps Stokes
for the company from New York to
F~arnsworth to ove the purchase price.
The entire morning session was oc-
cupied with cross-examination of Mr..
Arson Phelps Stokes.
At 2 O'clock the deposition of j. D..
Hague Of New York was read. 1t re-
ferred to an interview wherein an
agreement was made by Farnsworth to
Stokes to purchase properties for the
Nevada company without profit or
commission to himself, and further, to
an agreement in Salt Lake wherein
FarnsWorth refused to show vouchers
for the amounts of the purchases be-
cause his counsel had advised him not
to do so.
]. G. Phelps Stokes went on the
stand and told about the party going
to Nevada in June, 1897. There was
some conversation on the train in ref
rence to the purchase of mining prop
critics and the formation of the Ne
vada company, and later the matter
was talked over more specifically at
Austin, New. His father, Arson Phelps
Stokes, thought it desirable that either
the Austin Mining company or a new
company take up the ~neighboring
properties, and Farnsworth was favor
able. Mr.. Washington did not approve
of the Austin company going into it,
so it was thought best to organize a
new company. His father asked Farms
worth if he would act as director or
manager as in the Austin company,
and Farnsworth said he would ask
Washington's permission, which was
given very willingly. At lone his fathe1
said to F~arnsworth that he wanted to
write Mr.. Hartley about the situation,
and ask him to join in developing some
properties. He wanted to know the
specific relations Farnsworth would
hold in the Nevada company. He said:
Mr.. Farnsworth, is it understood be
tween us, if we form the Nevada com-
pany, will you do your best to pur-
chase these properties without COM
mission other than the company carry
ing your stock three years and being
made director and manager" Farms
worth answered: ives, that will be en-
tirely satisfactory"
At this point in the testimony Judge
Street asked young Stokes if he vas an
expert mining man.
NO." he replied, 81 know nothing
except what 1 have picked up in my
relations with Mr.. FarnsWorth."
In line with the plaintiffs evidence
the answer was so suggestive of costly
experience on the part of Stokes that
it created smiles all over the court
room, and even brought a broad grin
from Judge Zane, counsel for Mr..
Farnsworth.
Further, Stokes said Farnsworth ex-
pressed the opinion hat the quartz on
the surface of the Shamrock group
the Gage and Bradley properties
Will Of W. S. Gage had just been adj
mitted to probate, and his father sug-
gested that they hurry TO a Francisco
to negotiate for the purchase of the
property before it was out of eXecu-
ton. Farnsworth said they had better
go to San Francisco. but that he HIM
self had better see young Gage, with
whom he was acquainted. in reference
to the purchase, because if Stokes went
it might cause Gage to think that much
interest was being taken in the prop
erty. At San Francisco. FarnSworth
said, he went to Cages office, but
failed to find him either there or at his
residence, and was told that he had
probably gone east. On returning east
in Mr.. Stokes private a on July 10,
his father suggested to Farnsworth
that he might need some money to buy
the properties on the spot. 1t was de-
cided that $4,000 would be enough, and
his father drew the check for hat
amount, which the witness saw. On
reaching New York, the new company
was formed and incorporated as the
Nevada company. The witness re-
turned to Salt Lake or Aug. %, 1897,
and at the Knusford met Farnsworth,
whom he asked: What luck did you
have i n negotiating for the properties? '
Very good" was the reply. u have
secured all we want"
HON much did you have to pay?"
For the Gage" replied Farnsworth,
Il paid $27, $50; for the Bradley, SIG, 750;
for the Mitchell & Miller, $4,750. l
realize that you didn't instruct me to
buy the properties, but ] thought it a
SOOh OppO4 lOItllg " SCI ll1G4lI dllO Ol1-
Guided to close on the spot, trusting
you would confirm my actions. Bradley
has been standing out obstinately for
a large price, but finally consented,
with some reluctance, to accept S26, $50.
Gage was also high and said he had
refused $50, Geo, but after long negotia-
lions he agreed to take 2T.250."
Stokes said he replied that after con-
sulting his father he would be glad to
confirm the purchase and ask his
father to make deposit for the pur-
chase price.
He notified his father by wire that
the three properties had been pur-
chased for SEQ, 600, and Mr.. Stokes. ST.,
approved the purchase by depositing
$40, 900 in the United States Trust COM
pany at New York and gave Farms
worth a check for that amount. Later,
he gave him checks for $4,000 and $780,
600, making 6. total of $50, 600.
Stokes testified Thai he told Farms
worth in August, 1897, at Salt Lake,
that G.. A. Land would act as cashier
for the Nevada company and would
count the checks as cashier. After this
F~arnsworth made a statement to Land.
showing alleged OUTLAWS for the bal
ance of the money, amounting to 81. $50.
Mr.. Stokes occupied the stand until
the time ot adjournment.
Another Bankrupt.