The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1896-03-08
WAKE Up jim LEASE
The Receiver Will Remain in Posses
sion, Says the Court.
BRAY SAYS 1T DOESN'T PAY
Professor Hendricks Holds That
the Mine Would Pay II Prop
erly Worked-The Mountain
Chief Injunction Case.


win Bray and others over a lease on the
Wake Up-Jim came up for a hearing
before Judge Mediation yesterday
morning on a motion of the defendant
to dissolve an injunction and to set
aside the courts order appointing a re-
ceiver to take charge of the property
under the lease. because. as Mr.. Hen
bricks claimed, his copartners tried to
freeze him out and did not work the
mine to good advantage. John Nance,
Tom Waters and Mr.. watson testified
about the condition of the mine and the
lease under which they had been work
ing with Mr.. Hendricks. They denied
that they tried to freeze Mr.. Hendricks
out, but claimed he had refused to put
up his share of the expenses. and on
the 22nd of last November he said he
would have nothing more to do with
the gang" or the lease, and that since
that time time he had done nothing.
Mr.. Bray said in his testimony that
II conditions of the lease had to be
complied with anyone could have his
interest In II. but he said the conditions
would be modified If Hendricks were
out of it and then the others might
make days wages out of II. Mr.. Hen
bricks. he said, had not been deprived
of cents worth of the profits, because
there were no profits. They did not
keep him from working on the lease,
but he had voluntarily quit. Mr.. Bray
said they wanted the receiver removed
because the mine did not turn out
enough to pay the receivers salary.
You say IL the lease is not modified,
anyone can have your INTEREST,"" asked
Mr.. Leonard on REORGANIZATION.
Yes, you can have It, l don't want
IT. After Hendricks had drawn out of
the lease his partners offered him an
other chance to come in, but he refused
and went around and notified the as
sayer and hardware men that he would
no longer be responsible for debts in
CURED on account of the partnership
Did you not threaten to do Mr.. Hen
bricks bodily harm If he came around
the mine again."
NO, / did not threaten TO, but felt
like it."
Did you not say in Mr.. Cobban's Of
flee that you would kill him IL he in
terfered with the lease?"
NO / said IL he got the best of me l
would also get the best of him"
Mr.. Waters testified that he had made
a proposition to Hendricks to put in
81 900 each to develop the mine, but he
had declined the proposition.
Professor Hendricks testified that
they took charge of the lease some time
in November, 1894. and he represented
his interest by payments in money to-
wards the expense and later put on
man until Nov. 16. 1885, Then he learned
that his partners were not working
the mine properly and that they were
playing freeze-out game against
him. After that he visited the mine
every day. Mr.. Hendricks said he paid
for supplies and expenses up to Janu-
airy of this year. He never refused TO
have anything to do with the lease,
and ON the contrary told his partners
he would stay with IL to the end and
put in his 500 a month. He said the
mine could be worked to a profit IL IL
or IL men were put to work on a shift
Mr.. Hendricks said he had experience
In mining and he considered the mine
dangerous. caused by the fact that the
work was done too slowly, only four
men working eight hours a day. He
was always ready to pay his share of
the expenses II a sufficient number of
men were employed to work the mine
properly.
Thomas Moffett and several miners
testified that there were several large
bodies of ore in sight i'm the mine at
present, but they did not know it's val
ne. man named Lavell said he had
been told only a few weeks ago by
waters to OFFER Hendricks $500 for his
interest in the lease. Several witnesses
testified that If the mine could be work.
ed at a profit with one shift IL could
be worked with greater profit with
more men.
Judge Mediation, after hearing the
concluded there was sufficient
justification for leaving the receiver in |
though he said he would |
not attempt to express an opinion as TO |
Mr.. Hendricks interest in the lease |
He also said IL was a well-known fact |
that If mine could be worked profit |
ably with one shift IL could be worked |
to still better advantage with more.
Mr. Cotter, the defendants attorney.
then asked for a speedy trial and Mr.. |
Leonard said he was not opposed 10 IL. |
The court said the case could be set |
March %. but the date was not de- |
clded on.
The partition and injunction suit of |
Silas +. King against A. p. Heinze. |
T. Aug. Heinze, the Montana ore Pur- |
company and others was on |
hearing before Judge Mediation yes |
-erday afternoon on application of the |
plaintin for temporary injunction TO |
keep the Heinzes from working the |
Mountain Chief mine in which the |
plaintiff owned a third interest John |
2. Forbis appeared for the defendants. |
arthur r. Heinze filed an application to /
nave the case removed TO the supreme /
'ourt on the ground that Heinze was a /
Of the state Mr.. Scallon,
counsel for the plaintiff. opposed the |
application and said IL was not a prop /
r case for removal and the applica-
ion was a sham. Heinze had not yet
'een served in the case and Mr.. Scallon
lsked that the hearing proceed as TO
!. Aug Heinze and the ore Purchasing
company. A lot OF decisions were cited
" Mr.. Forbis and lot OF arguments
made, after which the court ruled TO
he effect that the United States court
night decide the question OF removal
or itself. but he would go on with the
earring on injunction. NJ Forbis de-
lined TO make any further appearance
nd the temporary injunction was
'ranted upon the filing Of 5000 bonds.