alltogether, unless we satisfy him
for his claim of ownership as founder
of the paper. He bases this claim
on the following points:
1. He is the founder and qualified
under the law.
2. It was not his intention to issue a
paper in the interest of Mormonism
purely; that he has been asked
in a correspondence from Washington,
whether he had read the article
"robbery of Church property" before he
published it.
3. If the paper ceases to exist, the Committee
still remains responsible to pay him
said recompence for the time of its
existence, because the Committee used
his paper as an advertising medium,
and contracted ^for^ advertisements to the
amount of 700 Dollars, without hiasking
him for his consent.
4. If the Committee even changes the
alltogether, unless we satisfy him
for his claim of ownership as founder
of the paper. He bases this claim
on the following points:
1. He is the founder and qualified
under the law.
2. It was not his intention to issue a
paper in the interest of Mormonism
purely; that he has been asked
in a correspondence from Washington,
whether he had read the article
"robbery of Church property" before he
published it.
3. If the paper ceases to exist, the Committee
still remains responsible to pay him
said recompence for the time of its
existence, because the Committee used
his paper as an advertising medium,
and contracted for advertisements to the
amount of 700 Dollars, withoutasking
him for his consent.
4. If the Committee even changes the