New-York tribune., 1911-11-25
MERRITT TALE ATTACKED
New kilograms in Case Show
How Settlement Was Made.
LION" is CALLED EXCITABLE
It Is Shown Rockefeller Sold for
S50,000,00O, Not 500, ,O0O,-
900, as Was Testified.

Persons familiar with the litigation be-
tween the Merritts and John u. Rockeiehet
IN sos and 1896 over tho Mesaba ore prop
critics said yesterday that the iron mines
and the Duluth. Missabe & Northern RAN
road had in rcelity cost Mr. Rockefeller SS''
Ta5 o0o. instead Of fhe $4,000 al which tue
cost had been fixed by Leohidas Merritt IN
hir testimony before tho Stanley commit
toe In Washington. on tho other hand. in
stead of Mr. Rockefeller reaplng as proht
tho difference between 100000 and 500
900 600, the present estimated value OF the
property his profit had bccn the difference
hrtveon sara. 600 and $50, 900, 900. the
price at which he had sold the properties in
ip0t
II Vas said that the profit was not small,
hut attention was directed pointcdly 10 the
difference between tho sums named by
I.oonidas Merritt and those said to be tho
! true igurcs
Alfred Merritt is n phlesmatic man II
vas said. and ho told rather cool story.
bat Loonidas f. an eXcitable man. Wh"
recognized the dramatic possibilities OF the
situation. 500 what he said in answer TO
| Stanley.
"'You went back into the woods? said
Mr. Stanley Yes Lon replied i went
back into She woods-tramped back in the
snow though II was summer ~ the time.
WHY, Lon has been telling that story
for years. was UP fl Maine few years
ago at ono Of the lakes up there ana a
college professor said 10 me that he had
heard story about Mr.. Rockefeller that
was blood curdling in its atrocity. lie saio
he had heard It from man in Mexico ana
I.then he told me the story 10 which the
STANLEY committee has been listening.
aeeeanzed as an Old Friend.
Wait I said. The man who told you
that was Lon" Merritt
What" said the professor YOU knew!
and he was satisfied.
The vav Stanley got the story was DS
going up 10 Duluth last summer and NOUS
ing around for whct he could learn about
those ore properties. He heard of Lon
and Lon told him the story. Then lie
called Lon as witness"
Lon" told the story the first time on the
witness stand in 1885 I'm the suit brought by
the MerrItts 10 recover the value Of the ore
properties from John ID. Rockefeller. alleg-
part OF Mr.. Rockefeller in regard TO the
value Of certain properties he put INTO
general iron mine consolidation Inc Unit
ed States Circuit Court i'm Duluth aWardeu
$4,000 damages TO the Merritts. MI ROCK
efeller appealed to the Circuit Court OF APP
peals. and a new trial was ordered. "on
technicality. in q certain sense, it was said
yesterday, the argument of Mr.. Rocketei-
lers attorneys being that the damages
should be fixed on the basis OF compensa-
ton for the damage received and not on
the speculative value OF the property.
The question whether there was fraud
or not was one OF fact for the jury, ana
the court on appeal did not attempt to de-
termine IT, Judge Sanborn, referring 10 the
charge OF fraudulent Misrepresentation
simply said that II was supported by some
evidence and for the purpose of this dis
cussion will be taken as established lie
fixed the damages on a compensation basis
at s23i, ,4Of 2s
Merritts Ask for a Conference.
The Merritts went back to Duluth, and
month later the following telegram was
received by George wellwood Murray Mr..
Rockefeller's attorney in the suit
Duluth, Mimi. Dec. 90. 1896. -
To Mr.. George Welwcod MurIa!, N, ~, 9"
Wall street Mills Building, New ork,
Washburn to-day requested cohIerent nie ei.,,
between YOU and myself New York Clty
ON whole subject claims the Merntts otI.eI
than y. b. Merritt 7. a. MerrlIt aiio ,D
Eugene f. Merritt with view Oh anlcapIe
/, settlement. Claims can nave run autnoI
ity without intervention a. a. Harris,
Suggest If conference result In nothing
no harm can be done either partys claim
Has matters in such shape ne can PersVn
slly negotiate complete settlement II aiteI
conference YOU desire to meet him 1uftner
with that object I'm view Blsmes a. a. iai @
ris somewhat for the extreme acll9h 81 W
NIerritts Told him | had no authority III
the premises. and did not even know a
conference could be had Says he regards
A. Merritt case best. John next. A Il. Met-
rtt next and Leonidas weakest. Ihink le
has other business in New YORK Clty so
that ttip need not be taken alone Tor pur,
instructions JOSEPH B. COTTON.
Joseph B. Cotton was the Rockefeller at
tornev In Duluth and Washburn was the
Merritts attorney Mr.. Murray sent the
following reply to Mr.. Cotton:
New York. Dec 81. 1896.
To Joseph Is. Cotton. Lyceum BuildlhS'
Duluth, Mimi.
Telegram received. Under no circum-
stances can we compromise an accusation
ur fraud Essential prerequisite 10 any
conference that Washburn state settle
mcnt II made shall bcude. first, complete
Withdrawal Of AL clHrges OF lraHd am
instrumentation: secondly, written
statement, in form TO be agreed upon, win
permission 10 publish. that shall intelli-
gently explain consistently with tho eVl-
dcncs given b]' defendants witnesses, erio-
neous statements Of plaintiffs witnesses
and intalligently explain how plaintiffs
witnesses came 80 testify orroueonsly.
With these things definitely understood,
and proyided further that Washburn has
Snu formal power 70 make complete and
fnsI settlement Of all possible controver-
sioy between parties named IN your LSle-
gram and 90 give tull releases, am Wiling
~ meet Washburn I'm New York WITHIN ten
dgyy for conference without prejudice.
GEORGE WILDWOOD MIRRa1.
rho Merrit's accepted Mr.. Murray
,,rrrs md a sntfIement was maOc for