DavidStewart_20181217_0043

2 q The effect of it was, you took the suit, and
you were to dismiss the suit by reason of Mr.
Haggin's agreeing to pay you eighty five thousand
dollars?

a For that interest that we got.

3 q Then what you really got, and what you really
sold was the cause of action set forth in the
Brannan suit against the Central Pacific
Railroad Company of California and others,
whatever there was involved in that suit you
obtained, did you not?

a Together with the stock
which formed the basis of that suit; yes.

4 q Whatever causes of action were in that complaint
enured to Mrs. Brannan?

a Yes.

5 q And it was that cause of action including
the stock, that you as her representation sold to
Mr. Haggin?

a Yes.

q Mr. Smith, did not Mrs. Brannan assign
the action of Samuel Brannan against the
Central Pacific Railroad Company to D. D.
Colton, at that time?

Objected to as not being the best evidence: if
there is any such assignment it should be produced.

SECOND RE-DIRECT EXAMINATION [red double underline]

1 q By Mr. Cohen[double underlined]: Was there any other cause of
action in that complaint than was founded
when the ownership of those two hundred shares
of stock?

Objected to; that the complaint itself is better evidence.

[bottom left margin:] Page 14