OCR Text |
Show ,f ?i DENY BREACH OF PROMISE ALLEGATION jj ' 1 jlij It Stolzonberger's Attorneys Declare It 11' j'M V-Tll Is Merely Question of Bor- h i iv 111 , 1 ) ,;: jj ' rowed Money. I ' f HlH' f E THE breach of nromlso suit rcccnt- l jt'j'iil fl ly brought, against "Edward P. Stolzen- ii r i )'!!i!n fl. bcrgcr by Amelia Brink, a widow, '.he j, ii j.ij'lr plalnlirf alleges that on the 1st of v j July, 3003, Mr. Stolzenbcrgcr promised to if T 'lii marry her. ami that relying upon this Miyv J J promise nho hns remained and Is still un- 4 kf i ii' 3 married. She further alleges that on No- lt ' ''Hit vemer 20. 1S03, the defendant took undue l ViU (!;' ! advantage of her unsophisticated nnturo L ! t' In nnd betrayed her under a promise of mur-' mur-' jj Pi " 'M 'ij rlago. The plaintiff now prays for the lL " I'.,'' sum of $50M as a recompense for her 1 y broken heart, as well as for her physical J vji ( 1 ', .md mental sufferings. J (j I ,:' ,r Gustln & lUcGurrJn, the defendant's at- 1!!'N - torneys. when seen yesterday aiternoc.ii, i i '''is i ) vo out tne following stnlcmcnL of their j ;f sldo of the cnae: '"On October 30. 1003. Mr. ' f Stolzenbcrgcr lent the plaintiff J1&2.60. and j '' j1 'j i Amelia Brink gavo hor note promising to l ,1 1 ,j ,;K pay the Eame within ninety days. At the ', j , !(,';, j, lame time she executed a chattel rrort- " 'i.f gage on. her household property as a sc- (IM"M oisrlty for the note At this time Mr. L C1,' ' "j i Stolzcnbergcr went to her house to make h i' ! ,in Invoice of. the articles of furniture, just ' ' l u i . as ho does to everyone's houac where he ,! ''-if. lakee a mortgage Now this lays him l 'I open everv day to become a victim of this V i i sort of blackmailing, but this Is the first fi' ' i" I tlmo that ho has ever been accused ot !' '.j anything during the slx,yenrs that he has . " ' 1 , engaged In tho business in Salt Lnke. i j. Moreover, If he had been in love with I ), I, i 1 ' tho woman at this tlmo. as she alleges. II i 1 ' I isn't It more reasonable to suppose that I , ' j ho would havo been giving her money ln- , ' " stend of lending It nnd demanding a mort- 1 j ' gago, as ho docs with all his other cus- V ' ! 'J) tomcrs? , t , "In accordance with tho agreement. , i IH Amelia Brink kept her Interest paid up to I', i I March 30. 1WJ. and on March 14 of the i ' ' ' same month ehc paid $117.r0 on the prin- i )) clpal. This left a balance of $7f due on I , t tho principal, but upon this sum Hhe lts ri; repeatedly declined to mnke any interest , .'i . payments. Consequently, we started forc- j I i .I- clo'suro proceedings in the City court i I ' I, i 1';. against her, nnd on the ISth.of this month !,',(, ill 1 ''' sho was sci-vcd with a warrant by tho i J ! 1 , Sheriff. Four days later, or on Friday. 1 , I ahe appeared In court and lllcd this com- ' l' ''; plaint against Mr. Stolzenbcrgcr for HJs M ' breach of promise." 1 , It was later learned from Mr. Stolzen- i ')A berger that during the month of June, ML1 . .5 IMi. ho held u chattel mortgage on prop-j prop-j l1 !. , f-rty owned by Amelia Brink, which was - i subsequently paid off by hor. |