John P. Cabanne, Pierre Chouteau, Barthole Benthold, Bernard Pratte, and Michael Smuel vs. Charles Hempstead, Theodore Hunt, and Manuel Lisa
View original image: Page  027
[missing figure]

to stop the Boat as the missouri, that
came down same time in the month of November following
and was stop at the camp that LisaLisa was sent for
that he Deponent accompanied LisaLisa to the Cantonment
some conversation took placed between LisaLisa and
when it was proposed to refer the difficulty to disinterested
persons and the parties entered into penal bonds binding
themselves to abide by the decision of those persons they
decided in favour of LisaLisa , to whom the and
were delivered, He, LisaLisa , being by said decision to
pay the sum of five hundred dollars, which the
said had promised said an the receipt
of said and from him and which said
sum of five hundred dollars has been paid by said LisaLisa
to said He citolaux having given up the said and
that in the summer of eighteen hundred & twenty
be Deponent and thomashempstead as agents of the
MissouriMissouri Fur Company FurMissouri Fur Company company were upon by
some of the all partners of . who Claimed
those and Pettries or the valued thereof they were
by deponent to the executor of LisaLisa who had
died a short time previous to the said application
Deponent understood that CabanneCabanne had proposed to
refer the matter to arbitration and advised CharlesCharles Hempstead
HempsteadCharles Hempstead Executor of LisaLisa to do so It was so agreed
upon we of St. LouisSt Louis was chosen an the pant
of HempsteadHempstead Executor of LisaLisa and kaskaskia
the part of CabanneCabanne . To whom the case was refered
and Deponent were both called upon by the

View original image: Page  028
[missing figure]

parties for a statement to be made before those Gentlemen
selected as asbitrators Deponent afterwards understood
that they could not agree and called in JamesJames
as ampires and that he decided in favour of
CabanneCabanne & Co. - Deponent never was called upon by the
asbitrators after was called in nor by
himself an the day after the award was made
he Deponent called and asked him if
he thought be had fully understood the case before
he decided to which replied that he thought
he had Deponent there for the first time event into
same explanations of the matter to where
replied as well as deponent cannow recollect that be
would probably consider the matter again
said an the day following this explanation Deponent
either understood from we himself or from
some other person who had conversed with Clemens
on the subject that if the case had been as wall understood
by him Clemens at the time be made his decision as it
was after Deponents explanations, he, thought
be should have decided differently but whether it come from some
told Deponent so himself or whether it came from some
other person who said he heard say so Deponent
cannot at this time positively say

examined by complainants. question are you our of the furthers of the MissouriMissouri
far company.

answer I am