Page:Oregon Historical Quarterly volume 21.djvu/216



204 F. G. YOUNG

S. W. Meek testify under oath that he has known Young at Taos but cannot tell if he is the same Young who died in this territory, he has seen him at Taos in '33 or '4.

Robt Newell testify under oath that he has known E. Young in this Terr, but never knew him before he came here. E. Y. said to N. that he had a son at Taos N. M. and said he (N. Young) was in partnership Jackson &. . . at Taos.

[Suggestions to the Committee on Claims to which was referred the claims preferred by Waldo & Jackson against the estate of Ewing Young.]

Dec. 16, 1845 Mr B. Lee:

Dear Sir As I shall start for the Rickreall this morning, I take this method to discharge the obligation which I am under to the "Committee on Claims" to assist them in investi- gating the validity of the claims preferred by Waldo & Jack- son against the estate of N [sic.] Young deceased. For them to establish their right to said estate it will be necessary for them to prove the following facts: 1st, They must establish the identify of the said Young; 2ndly. That said Young, Waldo & Jackson were in partnership, which may be done by the testimony of clerks, or other persons who knew that the al- leged partners have actually carried on business in partnership ; 3rdly. The amount of the stock invested, and also Young's liability to the other partners. And furthermore, one partner cannot bring an action against another while the partnership accounts remain unliquidated ; yet it is otherwise when the cause of action arises out of a transaction entirely distinct from their general dealings.

I will also say to you that the depositions which Mr. Waldo has procured and now brings forward to support the validity of his claims against the estate of said N. Young deceased,