Letter from David King Udall, 25 August 1888 [LE-41880]

St. Johns Ariz. Aug 25^th 1888.

Prest. W. Woodruff. Salt Lake City,

Dear Brother: Your favor fo the 14^th inst received, I regret very much to learn of the [apprievet] condition of Bro. A. M. Tenney's feelings in regard to the decision of the High Council of this Stake in relation to the difficulties between bro. Tenney and the St. Johns Printing and Publishing Company All of the Presidency of the Stake are intrusted parties in the case, we wrote you concerning how the High Council should be organized under these circumstances, and in your letter March the 10^th you in structed us that the oldest High Coun cillor should preside After due notice

95 2 to all interested parties, the High Coun cil was organized according to your instruction. After a thorough invesigation of the transcript of the Bishops Court and such [illegible] as was obtainable the Council did what the Bishop's ^Court^ reccomended Bro. Tenney to do.

The Bishop's Court based its decision on the theory that it had no right under the circumstances as they viewed it, to change or decide otherwise than in strict accordance with the letter[ illegible ] of the contract.

The High Council based its decision on the theory as they viewed the circumstances that the brethren should pay not strictly according to the letter of the contract, nor be left to the[ illegible] of Bro. Tenney's judgement.

96 but stated in the decision what they considered would be just between Brethren.

We will not attempt to make a detailed statement of this case, as we presume you do not at present desire to be burdened with all the evidence. And the probabilities are that John B. Milner the majority stock holder in the Company will appeal the case from the decision of the High Council. In fact he has already given notice of an appeal, but he may possibly on an excerpt of his last letter change his mind.

Strange to say! Our High Council has heard but two cases and in neither case has either party been satisfied with the decision.

97 4 The following is a copy of Bro. Tenneys letter to the High Council in reply to the Clerk's Notice.

Quijotoa, Pima Co. Ariz. May 17^th 1888. S. D. [Moon] Esq. St. Johns, Apache Co. Ariz.

Dear Sir: Your notice reached safely notifying me to appear before the High Council at Alpine. Of course you are aware that it is out of my power to be present at the time you state. I take it for granted that the rules governing High Councils require you to notify all parties concerned and it is a matter of compliance on your part.

I am unable to comprehend why it is necessary for my presence, as my point was to reach the cash which I obtained by means of a compromise. Lest I lose some benefit by neglect on my part I hereby ask for more time, and until the authority that has called me in question releases me Respectfully your Bro A. M. Tenney.

98 5 The circumstances attending this case were such that the Bishop was unable to have Bro. Milner or his agent present at his investigation. Bro. Tenney's extreme circumstances seemed to compel the Bishop to proceed without further delay and adjudicate this vexed difficulty. By the way, it had then been bringing fire for about a year. The Bishops Council reached its decision, made its reccomendation for mercy which Bro. Tenney complied with, when a few of the minor stock holders who were present (some of whom were very poor and had to borrow the money) assumed ^and paid^ the entire indebtedness, expecting that all of the Stockholders would comply with the decision. But instead thereof Bro. John B. Milnar appealed the case. The amount paid by these poor brethren was just [unable] the amount of Stock they owned in the Printing and Publishing Co. that, they have laid out of the use of from the 15^th of last November up to present date. The High Council knowing these facts did not feel to postpone the case.