There are no known copyright restrictions on this item. You are free to use this item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. Washington University Libraries does not assert copyright in reproduction scans of public domain materials made openly available on its websites. For more information on policies and procedures governing the use of materials, contact digital@wumail.wustl.edu.
The original document is part of the Missouri State Archives St Louis Circuit Court collection.
This electronic document is published as part of the St Louis Circuit Court historical records project.
The original document is part of the Missouri State Archives St Louis Circuit Court collection.
you orator
Barthola,
That some time about the
day of July in the year one thousand eight
hundred and seventeen
with manuel
intered into written
articles of capartneship for tho the purposes
of trading with tho inorder up the missouri
and its Tributory streanes.
things stipulated and agreed between the
parties in and by the said written agreements
that tho said copartnership shared continus in
the space of five year next anouncing the date of the
agreement subject however to be
sooner by the majority of the partnerners. That
the profits and lap if the business should be
divided and come in equal portinus by the partis; that in case if difficulties either in
the deliberations of the firm or in the transactions
of the company the same should be
the said Imunell should be interested in and
one third part of
the concern thereby making the said `Hunt and ' Immelle together have an interest equal to
that if one of the other partness acc which
said articles if coportnership a copy of which
is herewith exhibited marked me /- and prayed
to the taken as a part of this
And your
they together with the said
articles of partnership purchased large quantities
of merchandise and other articles suited to
the indian trade and carried on the
said concern in trading with the
until some time about the
april in the year one thousand eight hundred
and ninetten.
said company at which a majority of the partners
were
Prathe
and The o dore
which meeting the said Barthatomen Barthola
and michael E Immeela apented and agreed
This electronic document is published as part of the St Louis Circuit Court historical records project.
The original document is part of the Missouri State Archives St Louis Circuit Court collection.
it was agreed by the said parties. by a certain instrument
in writing under the land and
abandon to manuel his a one of the partner
thereaf the
of the company in the upper
block with shop and
with the establishment of Forts sisa and
company from the said manuel lia it
was provided
not take effect until after the complete and
entire
in the appear missouri and
the company should have bear samoved cahich
is a to he done with all comonteil speed and
without any
of
of the property
might not be
he depositea safely and secerely on accoorent
of said comapny and
is some part of the above mentcoied forth. then
to remain free of charge until the same world
he brongth away. And it wad further agreed
that if the said manuel his should amine
should he enterely settled and closed. he should
not enter into trade with the indans opon his
own accurent nor inter into the
the property of the company other of that
which the company might yet have to
nor of the proccor of sale therefore
the company. and
and other article remained on hand should
he stree the property of the company. and
the said manuel in and by the last aforaid
agreement agreed to pay the said then
partner in
donment. lestain sum of money in that agrement
mentioned. all which together with there-
planatory
from the said agreement. And the said
part is by another agreement agained
a may
the
micre fully to explain the first artich of the
last mentined agreement
that the said manuel was to take and that the
said company cold and aband oned unto him
the establishments known by the name of most
his a and most valeans with all their
This electronic document is published as part of the St Louis Circuit Court historical records project.
The original document is part of the Missouri State Archives St Louis Circuit Court collection.
on the upper Missousi together in th the negro, blacksmith
shap, tools, homes mules and hago - and in like manner
ace the effects merchandine and stock in trade of sade
company that should remain unsold and undisposed
of on the upper missouri after the spring trade
should have been concluded in the manner
therein after mentioned - and it was further agreed
that the time to he allowed for the finishing of
the spring Trade by Barthalomen Berthold
of the agents of said company there on the
next that is that whatever contracts on Trade
made and done should befor the benefit
of said company. are which cover
appear by the said two agreements her with
exhibitted marked no 2. and prayed to he
taken as a past of this bill.
And your braton
true intent and meaning of the said two last
mentioned agreements were that the said company
should see to the said manuel the said trading
establishments and such property as the company
had originally received from manuel
but that the goods
by the company
were to he sold for their benefit, or brought away.
and that the suplementat agreement explainings
the first article of the first agreement, was intended
to fix a time within in which the company should
cease Trading at the said
to give to manuel the property of the company on
the contingency of its nut happening to he then
sold. Your oraton think this the fair construetion
of the whole of thesiad two agreements taken
together and expreply
hear any other meaning it was a mistake
in drawing them up and nut the and on landing
at the parties.
And your
after the execution of the siad text mentioned agreemets
the said
said John
his interest and
effects of
paid to
And your braton further state that on
or about the
year cast aforeoaid and before the agents of
the company had any notice of the above
agreements a large quantity of the good and
merchandise belonging to the paid company
and forwarded for that springs trade
and
This electronic document is published as part of the St Louis Circuit Court historical records project.
The original document is part of the Missouri State Archives St Louis Circuit Court collection.
and in like manner a large quantity of the same
goods was by said
of May of the same year with paul Poimean
at the month of the river park. and the
said
of the
three hundred and twelve
park containing five hundred and ninety one
pounds he
garnished
manuel
with the goods delivered to him as aforesaid about
one hundred and fifty summer heaven skins
forty two good heaven, forty good
twenty summer
skins. Sixty
fifty
And your frators further state that
in the spring of the year
hundred and twenty
part of said
refused to render and deliver to them
belonged to him as being the proceed of the
sales made of the company goods after the
day of June one thousand eight hundred and nineteen
having made his last will and in
matter. The said manuel
at
the
hundred and twenty
stead and many
named in the said last will and
upon themselves, The execution
caused The said will to he July proved and
touk out
of the aforesaid
of are the god
of the said manuel.
And your fraton further state that
on an about the
in the year last aforesaid by a certain
agreement under the hand and seals of
the said charles S. Hempstead executor as
aforesaid and your oraton
Berlhald. Premi
This electronic document is published as part of the St Louis Circuit Court historical records project.
The original document is part of the Missouri State Archives St Louis Circuit Court collection.
that whereas difficulties existed between the
late Mur company of mcpr. cacami to
and the late manner Les a deceased
nelatini to a quantity of Murs and
for by m. michacle Lminece on the
and also as to some
privance in order to adjust and Aelter the
same according to the Seventh article of
The article of spoination of said
therely
to the final
premie menard and
decide the sarne according to the
Seventh article. and in case the paid asbtration
could not agree they
cace in an unpire whose award
was to he final - as mine fully appear
by the said
marked. no 3. and preyed to he taken
as a part of their wic.
And your fraton further state
that the paid premie menard and
asbitramene and not Lecing able to agree on
in about the twenty fifth of argent our there
and eight hundred and twenty. chose
parne and the said
taken upon himself the
on in about the day
his decesicion and award in unting and therely
determined that the
agency for
just Lia helonged to the fenin of
Leo-and that his agency for that company
only ceased on his return to most Lia
which said award signed by the said
menard
blemens in herewith
and prayed to he taken as a part of
this lie -
And your aratin further state that
the fun
to belong to the company. are the same
herein before stated to have been brought
down by
to said mannel in his life time and by
This electronic document is published as part of the St Louis Circuit Court historical records project.
The original document is part of the Missouri State Archives St Louis Circuit Court collection.
are
to grant your
to came the said
and the said Many his a
your honor to
And m
John P.
B. Poath &
bhaler
man lia
Mheadon hunt
BocB.
My feestn there
& 5.20
him brought to louis - and your
of his a after the said award would Rane
said
But know so may it please your
Honor The said
many
same with your oraton or
any
thereof have
the price Thereof to the
on oratin therefor. all which reley
and doing are against equity and good
and perfect
the premuses aferes acil, and particularly that
the said
not
aforermer ; and that the said parei executive
excuter may set forth how much they
have received on the
such
This electronic document is published as part of the St Louis Circuit Court historical records project.
The original document is part of the Missouri State Archives St Louis Circuit Court collection.
The joint and
March S.
Manurm lisa deceased
complaint of John p
Pune
to themselves
advantage of exception, that
uncertainties insufficiences and
said Bill of conplaint contained, for
there of as there Dependents are adviced in mannual and necessary
for them to make
What they have
deceased, at the time, and in the
and that the exhibeted ranked no. 1 of
of then Bill is a copy of said articles of
That said partners purchesed goods- handed the same
until the time stated in said Bill, and that at that period
a majority of said partners did sell and abandoned to said Manurl
and in the
said artecles all which may more fully appear by reference to said
Bill of complaint -
These said Dependents
ignorant of any meaning intent of said to articles of agreement
the true meaning, and intent of said contracting pointes - that whether
ther is any mistake in arranging the said artlecles this dependents cannnot
of then
mistake occured, that said complainants shall fully and satisfactorly
prove the same according to the street rules of evidence in such cases-
these dependents
in various conversations
of said complainants
to, that there was a mistake in arranging up said articles, it
the construction of the effect of the said explanatory article that a
difference of opinion existed- this said dependents
that constraction of said articles only said complainants
said Bill of complainants- and shall
that said articles be constructed by the
according to the meaning and intent of said contracting parties as
therein-
There Dependents
bring informed and beleave it true, that said Micharl
after that
a quantity of merchandize recived by him from the original company
of Cabame & Co,
he delivered the
bring the same mentioned in said
3. attached to said complainants Bill- these Dependents
state that they have no knowledge of the
said peirre
said allgation in that behalf- and if it shall have after
This electronic document is published as part of the St Louis Circuit Court historical records project.
The original document is part of the Missouri State Archives St Louis Circuit Court collection.
appear that said
original company of
after the said
the
These said Dependants further day, they do not know
said
immrel
applied to sum for the same; they have been reformed
line that the equipment
of goods sent by said alliecharl immalls
the establishments of said company of
view, at a place called the
trading place of the
agents of said cabanne of, for the prees
of indians
his said agreement after the
traded the
the proceeds mentioned in said
in trade for
said equipment;
he sined as a clark to said
expedition, the trade arrony
one e thtoini
eitelrace del sansevan, to nehom he was to pay $ 400
upon his
services; that the trade much the said press indiner
of the said
equipment mentioned as agree and
the
fall of 1819.
by
virtue of said articles of purchase (
to give
said citrcrau nor not paid, thereupon said immeld
and said
ellanced agrred to upon the nehole matter in depute so
and chanles penttonedof the
who after hearring the proofs and allegation of the said
and
of the
so said alloneed said - (being the same exhibit also 2) the said
fens
speetner mentioned in said veupt (exhibit
so said
June
1819
siad alleehael i innell -- (which said $400
upon said Dependents
here been imposed of beleine it there
said
arbetretors amonded that said manuel sela should pery to said
immell
fer his sences in that expedition at the rate of $1000 pression
which
-- beat for what time, a hon much
not
knowing,
that they have been informed that
the above
treating, and depeteates furnished the vepecton
preteer, that furnished
said ellechael, said dependents commot find,
when deseormed
they pray may from
in
then popepen the
Dependants
inspection
The said Dependents further day, that then
informed and brlcive it
of siad
said
of said company of
This electronic document is published as part of the St Louis Circuit Court historical records project.
The original document is part of the Missouri State Archives St Louis Circuit Court collection.
and as one of athe problem after and had a
much only to
The said Defin clouds fenchon amusing Sarp, that it is true
that said allan
executons thus of as
the said
of all the properly
they coulod final - tret an
said Sins palbour so as changed in said Bill of complaint-
He said Dependent
that at the time mentioned in said Bill of complaning
Sum of Louis - and also
afenced at Council Bluffs, being in P Louis, the said Complain with
preped the said
in much as said
claiming said
sick did consent to the
The said
the proofs and allegations & each side, that they
and called in
made
the whole matter of the evidence subscribed by said
contrary she said
elements did not sum the evidence of said
He said Dependent
nor that they had called in
elemen's) decision — that he was informed of that decision and at
the same time informed that the evidence appeared had not
for which
legal and was delimined to said elemens to
informed him, that all that free submitted to him
articles of agreement of
and the receipt of said allowed
that he had not heard the statement not the
plicher - that her opinion judgement was formed
from the face of the paper
after he had made his arrounds-- he had a connection and the
subject with W. I.
of, and which if he had sombody before his decision neglect
have been different from what is was - or
as it
judged from the proper, submitted and from the should can ju;dge so-
that he had nothing to do much off .
further
conversation with
This electronic document is published as part of the St Louis Circuit Court historical records project.
The original document is part of the Missouri State Archives St Louis Circuit Court collection.
him, that Mr.
shal fellmmd had made on armed much out hearing the whole of the
facts and
to it, and denid that is the pehepes mne then premt he should lose
no time is smny the month aojurted by all clamens if he could
hem the whole order t v investeyate the sabyeeh a by my olhn
honest and and eompatent man to be maduedly o holm - Mr. Cabame
for himself t smidentood fn his poeale instontly eompleisd mech
the propoicteon, dejelaiming any mlenlia of enjoying any asrando not
property obtained - mad that if was night t first that Mr. Clombns
ought should hem the shose evidence the saw Depndent father
that he immidiatly mmt to said demon and infomed him of the commata much Mr. Cabome
and
to investigate the matter, and vense his around - he would
not do so, allegy that he did not wish to have any further
trouble with it the said Dependent further states, that he
infomed the said complaiments, B. pathe - p. bubame &
P. bhouteam ts of this determination of Mr. Clemom, and also of his
said Dependant hath wer since properped his nellingnep tis dtell siclnig
to have the whole matter arbitrated whom the evidence of said
hmmelb t peleher - could be obtained - the said Dependent further
states that said afenaud, and said remained in
did not nor would agree that any other shane saux blemm should
act as ampri -
The said dependant
that she knows nothing of the matter above in repect to said
arbitration only as she has since been informed by said Hampstead
that
aeccded to said arround she should home joined in that raticicaten
there to -
The said Defendants fanithn anemms day that for the
umens above stated, they do not conceive the above amand
legal, non just - and shall therfore insist in she Honorable
Court that said amard and ought not to be informed against
them as exceed on in afnuad
The said Defendants suneth amrnning - say that at
the date of the last mentioned tebmipion as aforesaid - neither
of said Defendants the qualified to act in execution for one time, and
owing to the illness of the she entrox for some time and the
change of the probate poing. mne sathe s granted to the said
Defendants into about as
Without that sc
Persanalhg appeanced before me the undroesaid
are of the justices of the Prace in made for the county aforesaid
Marry Sisa of Cs. Hempstrad the above defendants who being severally
mom, any that she faots mated is the above ammen, as of ofchin
sn oxledyo,
thay believe true - sworn to
in this
This electronic document is published as part of the St Louis Circuit Court historical records project.
The original document is part of the Missouri State Archives St Louis Circuit Court collection.
vs
Petitioner
Filed a
In
And the said complainants
themselves are exception to the said answer of the
defendants say the there said he and the matter
and things therein
sufficient and this they will prove in such manner
as shall be directed without this that the
matter allyed in the answer of the defendants
are
This electronic document is published as part of the St Louis Circuit Court historical records project.
The original document is part of the Missouri State Archives St Louis Circuit Court collection.
We reposing special trust and confidence in your integrity and circumspection do require and command
you that you cause to come before you such person or persons as shall be named to you by
Lisas
oath (to be by you administered) touching their knowledge of any thing that may relate to a certain
matter of controversy. Now pending in our
on the part of the said
under your seal to our said circuit court, with all convenient speed.
Jean P.
Brothertomen Berthord,
and Micheal Immel
vs.
Chales s.
mary
and
On motion of the attorney for the Defendants
it is ruled that a
of the peace of the state of
the Deposition of witnesses to be read on the
trial of the above cause on the part of the
Defendants.
Served a Copy of the within notice & Rule on Berthohmuse
Berthold
my County
Service $0.50
Cabaune Lothers
vs. M. Sisa's Exe.
Dif
Take notice that on the unlimit
instant
morning, abd six of the clock in the evening of that day
at the office of Joseph V.James
that purpose
witnesses before some
in our behalf on the trial of said suit=
This electronic document is published as part of the St Louis Circuit Court historical records project.
The original document is part of the Missouri State Archives St Louis Circuit Court collection.
Depositions of
wedneday the
one thousand eight hundred and twenty three
of nine of the clock in the forenoon and ix of the clock
in the afternoon of that day at the Office of Thompson Douglass
in the city of
missouri before me Thompson Douglass a Justice of the
Peace within and for the county aforesaid by
a
for the state of
in a certain caue name depending in the
for the county of
and I
and examined and the pad of the Defendants
and
hundred and nineteen Moment
of I P
of the said company an the upper
purchase and sale was to take effect an the first day of
same of the same year our which said first day of time
all the stack in trade of whatever discription soever at
the several trading establishments and
includings said establishments, were to be by said
Company turned over to the said
particularly appear by a reference to the Bill of sale
which bus
in this caue that in the month of July of the same year
a company was former in
was one and principal which was called the
For Company this company purchased from
individually every thing which be
purchased from
to
upper
be. Deponent,
was informed by
expected or anticipated same differently with a
at the
on
that
to the
to the
sale from
known and the upper
misouri with instructions, a Deponent
understood to dipoed of a
quantity of good which they
of the goods to a man by he
of trading them with the
day of June
his
those goods had been
and that it
was his determination when he
the
of
get the
the Commanding Officer at the
This electronic document is published as part of the St Louis Circuit Court historical records project.
The original document is part of the Missouri State Archives St Louis Circuit Court collection.
to stop the Boat as
came down same time in the month of November following
and was stop at the camp that
that he Deponent accompanied
some
when it was proposed to refer the
persons and the parties
themselves to abide by the decision of those persons they
decided in favour of
were delivered, He,
pay
said
of said
to said
be Deponent and
some of the all
those
died a short time
Deponent understood that
refer the matter to arbitration and advised
upon we
of
parties for a statement to be
selected as asbitrators Deponent afterwards understood
that they could not agree and called in
as ampires and that he
asbitrators after
he Deponent called
he
he decided to which
he
same explanations of the matter to
replied as well as deponent
said an the day following this explanation Deponent
either understood from we
some other
on the subject that if the case had been as wall understood
by him
was after Deponents explanations, he,
be should have decided differently but whether
told Deponent
other person who said he heard
cannot at this time positively say
far company.
answer I am
This electronic document is published as part of the St Louis Circuit Court historical records project.
The original document is part of the Missouri State Archives St Louis Circuit Court collection.
ques. Was the decision of the arbitrators and
before your above mentioned application to
ans. It was-
ques. How have the proceeds of the
dispute been applied and in whose hands.
answer. They were turned over by
of the
to that company.-
Re-examined by Defendants.
ques. May the
of the arbitrations, interested directly or indirectly
in the event of the awards. or is said company
now interested in the event of this suit.
ans. No. because the
the estate of
and are
same let this suit
ques. Was
said goods at the
said several arbitrations a number of the said
firm of
ans. I do not know of my own knowledge. but understood
both from himself and
a small insterest in that company
ques. Is said
did be die-
ans. He was killed by the Blackfoot
the yellow stone
question. was
before the arbitrations
Choutan Laws and
firm of
Furs
ans.
the
there made in relation to the transactions are the
upper
much the same as I have made to day.-
Sworn to
before
and between the hours first
above written
Justice of the Peace
This electronic document is published as part of the St Louis Circuit Court historical records project.
The original document is part of the Missouri State Archives St Louis Circuit Court collection.
We reposing special trust and confidence in your integrity and circumspection do require and command
you that you cause to come before you such person or persons as shall
oath (to be by you administered) touching their knowledge of any thing that may relate to a certain
matter of controversy. Now pending in our
on the part of the said
by you as aforesaid into writing you are required to send to same together with this commission enclosed
under your seal to our said circuit court, with all convenient speed.
On motion of the
attorney for the said defendants it is ruled that a
peace in the state of
depositions of
the above
defendants,
Take notice that in
the above
hour of nine of the clock in the morning of six in the
at the office of
I shall take the
of the defendants.
126
vs
The Execution of this
appears by he
schedule
given at
Fees - $ 2.50
Served a Copy of the within
County
This electronic document is published as part of the St Louis Circuit Court historical records project.
The original document is part of the Missouri State Archives St Louis Circuit Court collection.
Take notice that the
hours of light of the clock in the morning six of the
clock in the evening of that day, at the office of
take the acpositions of
an thereby to be read in behalf the defendants in a certain
sent in
whereyou are plaintiff
Served this
notice by
in the city of
Copy Notice
This electronic document is published as part of the St Louis Circuit Court historical records project.
The original document is part of the Missouri State Archives St Louis Circuit Court collection.
Deposition taken at the office of
of
the hour of six in the forenoon and six in the afternoon of the
sameday and continued from day to any to the fourtenth
of the same
taken by
evidence on the
circuit court of the county of
and in which
charles
the part of the
That or the
hundred and twenty
he acted as
in
the
to
in the
him on which to form is award the deponent further
saith that
parties aforesaid or any one as their agents
the said
that
appointment by the
The deponent further saith that after the
subject and
was
had not observed to the person whom he being was
it might have had on his
evidence on which his
or award would also and have been given- That
some that time after he was applied to by one of the parties
and stated as a reason that other evidence might be added
which might infulence him to give a different award
it
different award in the same
the
a different award from the me given
This electronic document is published as part of the St Louis Circuit Court historical records project.
The original document is part of the Missouri State Archives St Louis Circuit Court collection.
Deposition
filed
Opened
This electronic document is published as part of the St Louis Circuit Court historical records project.
The original document is part of the Missouri State Archives St Louis Circuit Court collection.
In the year One thousand eight hundred
and
present
In
the State of
for himself & in his name of the one part; and
Consent stipulates
of the other part: which said parties in
presence
of, and
and friends herein
Thomas Riddick
and
the part of the said
hare
to here made and
The
which
“That the said
promises to give the said
Lawful wife- & to
face
and when with of the parties requests it of the ochor:
"The future
acquired (“
which partnership
to the
"The said future
in any manner be held liable for the
of the ochor, made and contractor before the
celebration of the said marriage: They shall be
Contracters it. upon then proper estate,
the other
liable.
“The portion which the said future Wife brings
into marriage, is the same of six hundred and eighty
coming from the estate of Louis
her father, which said sums is here
counted to the said
acknowledges to have recored the same - and for
which he gives full and entire acquillance to the
said
"The said future
the said future wife of the sum after hundred Dollars
This electronic document is published as part of the St Louis Circuit Court historical records project.
The original document is part of the Missouri State Archives St Louis Circuit Court collection.
to have, and to take the said
so soon as she may
preference upon all the estate of the said future husband;
which said
properly belong to the children which may be born
of he said marriage; and it shall be permitted
to the said future wife, and to the children which may
be born of the said marriage by
said Patnership to
bring into the said marriage, and which shall or
may be coming to them, or face to them
personal as real estate by inheritence
donation, or gift-
In
and clear of all
"The said future
friendship which he
and in lien, and place of
to the said future wife. The
estate which may be found
that is to say- the
read during her life- and the
personal property forever; and in the case- or the
and ther shall not be any child born, or to be born
of said marriage, he gives-
abandons to the said
use and enjoyment “
of all his real property for and during her Life-
and he gives, and abondans forever, and in full
property to the said future wife the
of all the personal property which shall be found
at the time of his death...
And for as much as it has been
and agreed upon between, and for the execution of
these presents they have
the Town of S Luios of
each one for themselves, and in their own hames, make
and exicute at
have also signed -
This electronic document is published as part of the St Louis Circuit Court historical records project.
The original document is part of the Missouri State Archives St Louis Circuit Court collection.
E Hrmprleado &
This electronic document is published as part of the St Louis Circuit Court historical records project.
The original document is part of the Missouri State Archives St Louis Circuit Court collection.
A List of the Real Estate of the Late
In
No. 2
Unconfirmed Claims on old
the Indian Boundary
Real Estate in St Louis County
This electronic document is published as part of the St Louis Circuit Court historical records project.
The original document is part of the Missouri State Archives St Louis Circuit Court collection.
No 3
Unconfermed Land
Confermed Land Claims in St Genereive County
Unconfermed Titles in Same County
In
In the
State good
No
A Lest of Real Estate of
Corro
A
Lest
Exhibit C. No 3.
This electronic document is published as part of the St Louis Circuit Court historical records project.
The original document is part of the Missouri State Archives St Louis Circuit Court collection.
Respectfully complaining
your Honor - your Orator Chester Honding of the
That on the
One thousand eight hundred & fourteen
then living
a certain Lot of Ground
in the upper
Jacque
from the Mipipippi which
(
by
west-
which aforesaid Lot is situable
by
(intended to be like measure)
for and in consideration of the price
fifty Dollars payable in fifty
meaning work on the
of him said Jacque Clamorgan to be done at all
such times
during the
Jacque Clamorgan then
a certain
him,
papers signed as aforesaid
in the presence of one
attached marked A & which your Orator
as
aforesaid wiling-
between said
the final payment by said
fifty Dollars in work as aforesaid the said
and
This electronic document is published as part of the St Louis Circuit Court historical records project.
The original document is part of the Missouri State Archives St Louis Circuit Court collection.
having executed, or paper any other miling or Deed
whatsoever relative to said
any acquiltance
of the bargain
and leaving as
and having previously madce of duly executed his last
will &
estate to the
non of
your Orator
his bill of complaint, and said infants be compelled
by
appointed
And your orator further
afterwards
in the
the said
and recorded,
Lot (he said
there of
or mortgage said
further agreed
performance of the aforesaid
One
& performs conjointly the
said
that is to say to pay to said
the said
and he said
to said
man not
Law but only in the manner above state - &
the aforesaid work non
recording to the
said
in said wiling - And your Orator
States that about the
year One thousand eight hundred & fourteen
This electronic document is published as part of the St Louis Circuit Court historical records project.
The original document is part of the Missouri State Archives St Louis Circuit Court collection.
for and in consideration of the
in which aforesaid
&
aforesaid
post and
said
on the day and years last aforesaid - at
Dollars Sold &
described Lot of
which
where of is here unto
Orator
his Bill:- and he
eighteen
Dollars: & said
mentioned
said lot of
reference to a Copy of
as part and
But
that said
making
in said granted &
nor the said
authority
much lop singing
This electronic document is published as part of the St Louis Circuit Court historical records project.
The original document is part of the Missouri State Archives St Louis Circuit Court collection.
and for as
due executor or any
contract and articles aforesaid, or be
in the premises than by the and
Honorable Court: To the end therefore, that the
said John Q Cabame,
aforesaid: the
perfect
aforesaid,
as if the same
particularly interrogated to be
Especially that the send Defendants many
according to the best of then respective knowledge
information and belief
1st. The said jacque
2.
Solo an aforesaid & for the price stated in said
3.
is not the proper writing with the proper
of
and was it not executed in the presence
4.
of said
fulfilled according to the terms, true
of said contract and article
clam organ - ?
5.
the only one ever executed by said
to said
6
any
7 Did not she said Clam organ
above
nice
&
if not.
8.
infants
9. Did not said
the aforesaid Lot to
This electronic document is published as part of the St Louis Circuit Court historical records project.
The original document is part of the Missouri State Archives St Louis Circuit Court collection.
in manner
10 Did not said
to said
please state -
11 Did not said
to
And that send Defendant may by the
Decrue of this Horonable Court be compelled to a
performance of the contract and agreement of said
excute
for the aforesaid Lot according to the line intext
morning of said article of agreement-and
according to the stated in such
provided-and that your
other and further recept in the premier as the native of
his case requires and as shall be agreeable to equity
good conscience-may it please your
This electronic document is published as part of the St Louis Circuit Court historical records project.
The original document is part of the Missouri State Archives St Louis Circuit Court collection.
The joint and
comptant of
Pure Chorteau Junior. Bern and halre, and
These Depondants non and at all times someafter saring, and worring
to theme his siverally and uspectively all and all manuo of benefit and
advantage of exception, that
unextamtish incefficin is and other imperfection in the said complainants
said Bill of complaint contained, for answer thereto; or unto so much
thereof as then Defendants the advised is matiual and necessary
for them to make arrive unto, and nor
That thy have from informed, that a partnership was formed
behrssa said complainants and said throdore
declared, at the time, and in the manner stated in said Bill of complaint
and that the exhibited marked No 1 of said complainants as part
of their Bill is a Copy of said articles of association —
That said partners purchased goods — haded the some
until the time stated in said Bill, and thats at that period
a majorily of said partners did sell and abandoner to said
and in the manner, on the terms, and for the consideration stated in
said Artecles all which may more fully appears by referer to said
two articles of agreement marked as exhibited No 2 in said complainants
Bill of complaint —
These said Deferdants further ammoring, say, that they are
ignorant of any meaning and intext of said two articles of agreement
forth in said articles — to which these Depondants again refer for
thi here meaning, and instant of said constructing ponties — that whether
there is any mistake in oraning the said articles these Depodants cannot
of thin
mistake occurred, that said complainants shall fully and satisfactorily
prove the same according to the sheet rules of evidence in such cases —
these Defendants
to
of said complainants ulatiri to the articles of agrreming above refused
to, that there was a mistake in oraning up said articles, it was on
the construction of the effect of the said explanatory article that a
defference of opinion existed — These said Dependants expreply thems
the construction of said articles only said complainants inged in then
said Bill of eomplains — and shall
that said articles be construced by the known and fixed rules in
law and equity, torrect, upon the whole fevor of said anticles and
according to the meaning and
therein —
These Depondants further arroring, say, that they have
here informed and beleave
asin the
a quantity of recieved by him
of Cabanse' &
he delivered the provereds of the same to said mamurss
bring the same mentioned on said receipts marked exhibit No
3. attached to said complainants Bill — These Depondants forther
state that this have no knowledge of the form petitions of had ed
by said
said allegation in that behalf — and is it shall hereafter
This electronic document is published as part of the St Louis Circuit Court historical records project.
The original document is part of the Missouri State Archives St Louis Circuit Court collection.
appear that said
original company of calamme&Co, traded then goods&much
after the said first day of since
the value of any such sales which the same can be as entained—
These said Defendants further say, they do not
said Manurs
applied to him for the same; they, have been informed therein it
time that the equiponent of goods sent by said Michail
was so one of the long established and will known depondencies
the establishments of said company of Calamne'&Co. on the
river, at a place called the Rres Village which was the usual
trading place of the agents of said Calamne'&Co. for the Rres nation
of Indians That said
this said equipment a
traded the Same
the proceeds mentioned in said exhibit No 3. was the articles received
in trade for said equipment; That after said
the tired as a Clark to said expedition,
one
for his services; that the hade with the said Rres Indians
of the said equipment mentioned as aforesaid was not finished until
the fall of
receipt exhibit No 3 —, and armed much the same at Council
by virtue of said articles of purchase (exhibit No 2), who referes
to give them up. because he said
services in the said expedition to said Rres Village — and because
said Citrtion was not paid, thereupon said
Manurs agrred to refer the whole matter in despite to
and
who after hearing the proofs and alligation of the said Manurl
and Michal R. Immell, an orded and decrred that in perses and
of the articles of sale dated
so said
forms&pettnes on extioned in said receipt (exhibit No 3.) belonged
so said
June 1819
Antone Cetilian the sum of $ 400 the wages promised to him by
said
here been informed of beleive it was
said arbitrants an orded that said Manul
Immull for his Services in that expediction, at the rate of $ 1000 preyeon
which was done as the said Dependants are informed of believe it trem —
bat for what time, a
not knowing, extrodinary —
that they have been informed that the above award was
writing, and defitieates fernished the upon
said Manual, said Dependants cannot
they pray may
mean time beleving from information that she said complainants here
in then popepeon the deflicate arround furnished said Immull the said
Dependants until upon the same being submitted to the
inspection and judgement of this honourable Court —
The said Dependants forther say, that the have been
informed and believe it true, that at the time of the trading
of said Mischaindere at the Rers village aforesaid.
said
of said complaint of Calamen'&Co. and
This electronic document is published as part of the St Louis Circuit Court historical records project.
The original document is part of the Missouri State Archives St Louis Circuit Court collection.
and as one of the partner aforesaid had a
auctiorety to upon the same matter as aforesaid —
The said Dependants further arrowing sarp, that it is true
that said
having made his last still
exceutors there of as stated in said Bill of Complaint — and
the said Dependants say. that hey have taken upon themselves the
fonders of said appointment and have received popapad themselves
of all the property real personal and mixed of said
they could and — but among said goods
said
The said Dependant
that at the time mentioned in said Bill of Complaint
the
Term of
aforesaid at Council Bleffs, being, in
preped the said Humpilend to
was much as said Immulls of pilchon
and world same
Humplind wishing to leave said despute settled, before the depondant of said
clamining said forms of petitions) without having, been
and without the
said, did consent to the
marked exhibit No 3, because he said Hemprtrad concernd
ortribed by the still of said
The said Charles, S. Hempstead, admets that said
and
hend the proof and alligate and each side, that they desagerd
and called in James Clemens
made
exhibit No 4.
but the said Dependant
the whole month of the evidence established by said parties he said
No planel and menand was establishmented he said claims. one the
eoxtrary, the said Hemprlead charge, the fact to be. that said
The said Dependant A Hemplead forther states, that he was not
apprised of the difference of opinion between said
nor that they had called in said clemons until after his (said
clemons) decesion — that he was informed of that decission and set
the same time informed that the evidences aforesaid had not been he and by him —
for which various he said Hamprtiad did not believe said an and
legal and was determined not to abide by it — that he said Dependant
immediately applied to said Clemons to knorr the facts, said Clemons
informed them, that all that true defnietted to him was the
articles of agreement of
manurl
and the receipt of said manual for the form
what he said not he and the station
nor pilcher — that his opinion&judgment was formed extruely
afore the face of the papers submitted —: he further said he said Depondent that
after he had made his arround — he had a commation and the
subject trith M. I. Pelcha, who had stated to him things
in relation to that affair which he had not true before apprised
of, and which is he had known before, his decision might
have been different from what is was — or word so that amount —
is it was, he concerned he had decided the only
judged from the papers submitted and from there he should
that he find nothing to do
therefore dismissed the matter from his
forther states — that the first some he saw one of the complainants
vig
conversation
This electronic document is published as part of the St Louis Circuit Court historical records project.
The original document is part of the Missouri State Archives St Louis Circuit Court collection.
him, that M. Calmens having, been called in as umpire by Missry.
facts and evidence, that under those inconstances, I never could consent
to it, and desired that as the
no time in having the matter adjusted by M. Clemans if he would
hen the whole evidence&re investigate the subject, a by any other
honest and competent man to be matually those M. Calame
for
the proposition, disclaiming, any intention of exforeing any arrond not
properly obtained and that it was right&just that M Clamans
ought&should her the whole evidence the said Depondant forther states
that he immediately went to said Clamons and informed him of the
commation M Calome
and
re investigate the matter, and untill his arron — he should
not do so,
trouble
informed the said complainants,
P. Choutean ss of this determention of M. Clamon, and also of his
said Dependant that ever since propossed his
to have the whole matter orbitisted where the evidence of said
Immell&Plicher could be obtained the said Depondant forther
states that said Immunel&Plech. renamed in
the arrand aforesaid, and said complainants during that time
did not, nor would agree that any other than said Clemons should
act as umprie —
The said Depondant
that the Snony nothing of the matter above in respect
orbitiation only as she has since been informed by said C S
that if, said Hemprlend had thought proper to have satisfied and
acceded to said arrond she should have joined in that ratification
thereto —
the said Depondants forther arrowing say that for the
reasons above stated, they do most concern the above arrevel
legal, nor just — and shall therefore must in the honerable
count that said arrond
them as execution as aforesaid.
The said Depondants forther arriving — say that at
the date of the last mentioned Submission
of said Dependants the qualified to act in execution, and
owing, to the illness of the executions for some time. and the
Depondants until about
Fieled
one of the sixtiees of the Prace in side for the County aforesaid:
knowledge,
they believe true —