Difference between revisions of ".NTAx.NDI4OQ"
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | �I think that from | + | �I think that from Websters letter and what I recollect of the circumstances |
of the case that much of the timber (which came down on the | of the case that much of the timber (which came down on the | ||
29 of April and which was passed through the boom between | 29 of April and which was passed through the boom between | ||
Revision as of 13:45, 25 April 2017
�I think that from Websters letter and what I recollect of the circumstances of the case that much of the timber (which came down on the 29 of April and which was passed through the boom between that time and the 25 of May) would have been lost to the owners had it gone loose into the St Johns as the boom at the mouth of the Aroostook even after it was repaired could not sustain a heavy load of timber. So that had the boom not been on the Aroostook it appears to me beyond question that their timber must have run out into the St Johns loose
S. Cary purchased M Hooper about 400 tons which had passed the boom [?] lying on the falls for about $75
This timber[crossed out] was trespass timber + M was permitt- ted to pay the boom on an agreement to pay $400 per ton, which M afterward refused to do - page 48
Timber cut by Tracy ---------------------- 63