Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1898-03-03
IN REALMS OF JUSTICE.
Supreme Court Passes Upon Cases Appealed
Thereto.
L. M. SCOTT ASSIGNMENT ARGUMENTS.
lowed by Rush After satur-
day Next.

The Supreme court varied the record
today in rendering an opinion in which
the decision of the court below was af-
firmed, the Judge fortunate enough to
be the only one upheld in more than
half "A dozen appeal cases passed on the
past three days being Judge A. N.
Cherry.
The case was that OF May f.. Brown
VS. Charles b. MARYLAND. In April. 1894,
VIM. A. Frailey, sydney G.. Fraiiey
Richard Gundry, Mary Gundry and c.
II. MARYLAND made n contract by which
the Bullion No. . mining claim In Rush
Valley mining district, Tooele county
was to be purchased by MARYLAND from
the other persons named. The mine
was to be conveyed to Markham free
of all Gains except Il mortgage lien.
and certain claims of persons for labor
performed, not to exceed the sum of
$4,000. Among the claims was one by
Mrs. Brown for $3.50, which MARYLAND
claimed was not included, but Mrs
Brown asserted was Included, and was
assumed by MARYLAND. The contract
was not clear on this point, and the
district court admitted parole evidence
to show that MARYLAND had assumed
the debt. Upon this proof the jury
gave n verdict for Mrs. Brown. An
appeal was taken, alleging as error the
admission of parole evidence to ex-
plain the contract. Upon this point
the Supreme court says:
Where the terms employed in
written contract are clear and un-
equivalent, Import what the legal OBJ
legation Is, and are not uncertain as
to the object and intent of the con-
tract, parole evidence Is not admissa-
BILE to contravert them: but whenever
the terms are susceptible OF more than
one Interpretation. or latent ambi-
guilty arises. or the extent and object
OF the contract cannot be ascertained
from the language employed, parole
evidence may be introduced to show
what was In the minds of the parties
at the thne of making the contract
and to determine the object on which
1t was designed to operate"
Upon this point, which is the vital
one In the case as appealed, the SUI
preme court holds that the district
court committed error There was some
other evidence improperly omitted, but
It's hearing was not sufficient TO change
the result. The decision of the lower
court is therefore affirmed.
The opinion was written by Justice
Bartch. and was concurred in by the
other members of the Supreme court.
The Scott Assignment
Judge Hiles was faced by n large
array OF legal talent today in the pro-
ceedings to set aside the assignment of
George NJ. Scott & Co.. which is being
attacked on the ground of fraud by
the Travellers Insurance company,
Wells. Fargo & Co. and the National
Bank Of the Republic. each of which
institutions Is creditor ofthe asslgnor
and seeks to have some other arrange
ment for getting a portion of its claim
than that provided I'm the deed of as
signment. Evidence in the case had
been submitted and today leading at
torneys on either side We're pouring
oratory and legal lore into the courts
ear with all the eloquence and argu-
mentative force at their command.
Arguments were finished at
o'clock this afternoon when the case
was taken under advisement.