The diamond drill. (Crystal Falls, Iron County, Mich.) 1887-1996, 1915-11-13

1890 ~"-"~~""
and Rough TO assist in placing the pro
perty When Il was finally placed
through their efforts they were com
pensated by FORMER. and In the pre-
sent decision the amount OF their COM
pensation was approved by the court.
About the same time. Coates and
Tweed, OF Duluth, sought an option on |
the Finnegan mine. adjoining the Han
ousek. Mr.. Tweed was introduced to
the Finnegans by Mr.. FORMER, and
when the option was closed, Mr.. For
nier disclaimed any compensation Tor
the introduction, but was presented
with three cent royalty on the
mine. Pascoe's claim TO share OF this
royalty was not granted by the court,
inasmuch as II was gift and the
transaction took place after the ter
mlnatlon OF the partnership contract
between Pascoe and FORMER.
In connection with this phase Of the
suit, the decision OF Judge Flanagan
is interesting.
/ MIR. Tweed desired TO obtain an OPP
ton on the Finnegan mine" he says
Tweed resides at Duluth. The proper
ty is located on or near Wakefield, Co
gebic county. Mr. Tweed asked Mr..
FORMER to advise him when the Finne-
gans could be found at home. Mr.. For
nier did So Mr.. Tweed went TO Besse-
mer and was introduced to the Finne-
gans by Mr.. FORMER, whereupon Tweed
opened negotiations with the Finne-
gans which terminated in an option.
"In the absence OF evidence OF any
understanding. or even any expecta-
ton, on the part Of either FORMER or
Tweed, that compensation would be
exacted therefor, TO hold that the mere
introduction OF Tweed to the Finne-
gans would entitle FORMER to compen-
sation, would be doing violence 10
common sense. We have not yet reach
ed point where II is legally necessary
for one. upon receiving an introduction
! at the hands OF mutual friend, to take
out his pocketbook and say, How
Muchl'
In the Hanousek claim. however,
Pascoe was fully upheld by the verdict
OF the court. He was awarded one
: half the money received by FORMER In
royalties and profits on the Hanousek
{ mine transaction, including all future
{ payments to be made on the deal. and
> no costs were allowed to either party
Q In his findings ION this case, Judge
Flanagan writes In part:
Upon consideration OF the testi.
mony and the oral arguments and
briefs OF counsel for the respective
parties, the conclusions arrived at are
THAT the partnership between The
complainant and the defendant For
, nier. evidenced by the writing signed
by them September %, 1912. reading
This Is TO certify that we have enter
ed into partnership in the handling o
iron ore properties was in existenc,
when the Hanousek transaction wa
commenced and concluded, and tina
u the Hanousek was transaction OF tn
: partnership.
After summing up the claims o
Pearce and Rough, and also the Finne
gan mine deal, in which Coates an,
!, Tweed were indirectly involved tn
verdict continues:
THE decree will require Fornie
TO pay Pascoe sum equal to one
, half of all the monies received by hin
out OF the Hanousek transaction. an,
to assign to Pascoe a one-half interes
in any and all existing contracts pro
viding for future payments to Fornie
on account of the Hanousek lease. r.
secure the payment by FORMER of tn
monies above mentioned the deere
: will give Pascoe lien on FORMER
= remaining half interest in the con
tracts mentioned, and on the monte
| payable Hereunder. No costs will b
allowed to either party"
/ John J. Pascoe was represented b
Attorney J. NJ. Kennedy, Charles +
FORMER was represented by JAS A
o'Nell, OF Ironwood. Tom Glance
handled the case for Edward J. Pearc,
. w p. Belden for Albert j. Rough an
Coates and Tweed retained washburr
Bailey. and Mitchell, OF Duluth. a
counsel. as well as Fred IT, Burk. {
| Ishpemlng.