The weekly Alaska citizen., 1918-01-21
BELL-CASCADEN
 DECISION NOW
 HANDED DOWN

In the district court room yester- day afternoon Judge Bunnell hand ed down a decision in case No. 2313, one of the Brooks cases of Bell vs. Cascaden, giving the decision to Bell and holding that $4,000 is still due him from Cascaden.
 The plaintiff alleges in his com plaint as follows, according to a copy of the decision handed down yesterday: That prior to the month of February, 1915, he had acquired certain mining properties in the Fair banks, now Tolovana, precinct, 4th judicial division, and on or about the 14th day of February, 1915, he gave to D. c. McCarty an option to purchase said properties for the sum of $10,000; that before the de- ferred payments fell due and were paid, certain difficulties arose be- tween the said McCarty and the de- fendant herein; that the defendant informed plaintiff that he, the de- fendant, could settle and adjust his differences with McCarty providing the plaintiff would reduce the option price above mentioned In the sum of $5.O0O; that the plaintiff reduced said option price in the sum of $5,- 900 upon the defendants promise to pay said amount to him as soon as the said McCarty paid to the defend ant certain moneys owing to said defendant by said McCarty and pay able during the summer of 1916; that said McCarty during the sum- mer of 1916 paid the defendant a sum in excess of $5,O00, and there upon said sum of $5,00O became due owing and payable to the plaintiff; that plaintiff demanded payment, and that no part of said sum has been paid save and except the sum of $500; whereupon plaintiff prays for judgment in the sum of $4,500, to- gether with interest from the first day of October, 1916.
 The defendant denies the allega- tion of the complaint and for fur ther and affirmative defense alleges that no note or memorandum in writing was made and subscribed to by defendant expressing any con- sideration for the alleged payment between plaintiff and defendant de- scribed in plaintiffs complaint and is therefore void under the statute.
 By stipulation the case was tried before the court without jury.
 The history of the case and the testimony taken is then gone into at length in the decision, testimony of both plaintiffs and defendants witnesses being given, with the fol- lowing summary: The defendants testimony Is generally in flat con- tradiction to the testimony of plain tiff and plaintiffs witnesses. He de- nies absolutely any agreement on his part to pay the plaintiff $5,000, and contends that the $100 was to be in full settlement. The prepondeI~ ance of evidence is wholly against him. In some parts the indefinite ness of his testimony amounts al- most to an evasion.
 The final conclusion of the deci sion reads as follows:
 The evidence shows that of the $5,000 agreed to be paid, the sum of $1,000 has been paid.
 CHARLES BUNNELL.
 Judge.
 The Bell -Cascaden case aroused great interest here, and was con- tinued in court for some length of time. At the same, time two other cases came up, that of O'Connor vs. Cascaden, and that of Bell vs. Gas. caden, another case concerning the title to mining property in the Liven- good country. The decisions in these two last cases have not been handed down yet.