The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1895-11-27
The President of the Hale &
NercrosS on the Witness.
Stand.
HE STAYS BY HIS CONTRACT.
Expert Figures Upon the Differences
in Ore Assays and Low Bullion
Returns.

The Hale e. Norcross mine suit, decided
by the Supreme Court in favor of the
plaintiff, but referred back to the lower
court for rehearing upon some minor de-
tails was resumed Yesterday morning In
Department of the Superior Court. II.
NJ. Levy, who was president of the mining
company in 1888, 1889 and 1890, gave the
same testimony that went SO far toward
making the case so famous in the annals
of California litigation. Attorney Baggett
questioned him:
Mr.. Levy, did you know the character OF the
ore extracted when you were president OF the
company?
Do you know the value of the samples taken
and assayed?
did at that time.
Do you remember the difference between the
battery ard car sample assays?
don't remember the difference now.
Did you know at the time that there was
difference, and whether that difference was
great or small?
knew there was difference.
Don't you know that it was great?
think it was, but can't remember how
much.
Did you ever complain of this great discrep-
ancy?
Did not superintent Heating complain of the
vast difference in the two assays and the small
returns OF bullion?
/ don't remember now.
Did you go down to the mill to see why this
was so?
didn't go for that purpose.
You were entirely satisfied with this state of
affairs?
Yes.
Notwithstanding there was a great differ
ence in the assays at the mine and mill, and
the bullion was falling so short that even the
superintendent was getting anxious and
"Here, here, We object to this line OF argu-
ment," interrupted Attorney Wood for the
plaintiff. ''I don't want any of Mr.. Baggetts
pyrotechnics."
This closed further examination along
that line.
In reply to question, the witness stated
that ne was paid on his contract one
eighth OF the profits of the ore crushed.
GLOW much money did you receive on
your contract?" asked Mr.. Baggett.
The question was emphatically objected
to and the objection quickly overruled.
II can't tell exactly-$27 900 or $28, 000."
"Your contract did not permit you to
get anything else-any part of the bullion,
or its price-did it,.
my contract called for only one-eighth
Of the profit"
You didn't want any of the concen.
trates shines or taillngs?"
my contract was for only one-eighth
the profit of ore crushed"
did you not insist that you should
share in them, and was not your request
refused ?''
''As stated, my contract called only for
one-eigbth."
J. w. C. Maxwell, expert and mining
superintendent, testified that he had been
a miner since 1852 and most of the forty
three years had been spent on the Com
stock. He had been employed by Sharon
to report upon the condition of mines in
that locality, was familiar with all mines
in the vicinity of the Hale d Norcross.
The general character of the ore was about
the same in all the mines Of the Comstock.
While actings as superintendent of the
Oyerman mine he had taken car samples
for assay and was we'll acquainted with
the value of its ores. This testimony was
objected to, on the ground that this was in
1866, while the Hale & Norcross ores in
question were taken in 1887 and 1890. The
objection was overruled, the court holding
that this was proper inquiry as to the
general value of the Comstock ores.
The witness said the car samples were
used to determine the amount to be re-
turned by the milling company. Not less
than 65 per cent was required from them,
and in some instances as high as ~ per
cent of the car assays was returned to the
mining company. He was then asked re-
garding those instances. The question was
objected to, the objection overruled, and
the witness stated that it was when the
mills agreed to return all the bullion they
saved.
Mr. Pillsbury asked the witness if he
should take "a 900 tons of ore, such as the
Hale & Norcross turned out in 1880 and
crush it in the best mill on the Comstock,
how great percentage would he expect to
get in retutnf
The question was objected to and the OBJ
lection overruled.
81 should expect from IS to so per cent
of the car sample assay" he answered.
In crosse examination he testified that he
based his opinion upon the fact that the
ores at the Overman were the same as
those at the Hole & Norcross and other
mines of the Comstock ANY free milling
ore of that character should produce from
IS to so per cent of the sample car assay.
The trial will be resumed this morning,
and it is thought that the case will be
closed this afternoon.
TILT 1II0DkMT nhcr hnhIM