The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1898-06-22

the company when the engineer leaves
its employ"
The witness said tha when he left
the Boston and Montana he left all his
notes and maps Wit the mpan
While you were in the employ Of the
Boston and Montana company. h did
you see of maps and drawings port
ing to show the general workings OF the
Montana Ore Purchasing company's
properties"
The Rarus maps were on exhibition
in the general offices OF the Boston and
Montana
on cross-examination. Mr.. Forbis
asked the witness the extent Of the en-
cheering work he was doing for the
Montana Ore Purchasing company, and
his answer indicated that he was not
doing very much work, and that he
was getting $3.50 a month for II.
"Nave o any feeling Of enmity
against the Boston and Montana COM
pany and Mr.. Batterman?" asked Mr..
Forbis.
only a general feeling" was the re-
ply.
You share the general feeling?"
Yes, sir"
AT $3.50 a month";"
mo, sir"
Mr.. Forbis asked the witness IL he
had not on a certain occasion said to
one w. L. Lee that he was now in the
employ of Heinze. and that they were
going to make II hot for the Boston and
Montana company: that he had lost his
lob throueh the influence Of Batterman
after he had ave- the company a mil
lion dollars that Batterman had no
sense. and tina every day he was with
the mpan he was losing money for
1t: that he had no friends among the
, men. and that he. the witness. was go
I ing 10 get even with him.
The witness said he did not remember
making any such statements.
= do you say that You did MOTT
n Il say l did not make any such state
ments."
The witness said that ne saw in the
general once OF the Boston and Mon
a tana a map OF the Rarus mine, drswn
n TO A 3O-foot scale. He saw another on
a ioo-foot scale in the private office OF
:. Batterman, In the company's general
Offices When Trerise saw the Dig map
y an engineer named Abbott was working
on Il. and adding the adjoining claims
y to IL. At that time. said the witness
Batterman Was in the employ OF ooth
Is the Montana ore Purchasing company
and the Boston and Montana company.
The witness admitted tina; since ne has
y been in the employ Of the Montana ore
Purchasing company he has made ar
sr affidavit in a suit brought against the
3 Boston and Montana and Butte and
a Boston Companies. regarding the veins
in the Dayton lode claim. and that tht
- lnAOITldkl1n Y RdN III NAN
lie obtained while ne was In the employ
of the Boston and Montana company.
W G. A. Kornberg. a mining engineer
testified that as a general custom tht
N maps and survey notes belonged 10 th'
"a company or person paying for them
to on custom work II was different. wher'
re an engineer did general work he usual
II ly retained his notes.
n James Macfarlane, formerly chief en-
Is gineer of the Anaconda, and now In tn
ID employ of the Montana ore PURCHASING
s. company, was the next witness. III
c. said that the employ of an engineer eN
IN clusively by one company was entirel!
r of a confidential nature, and any worl
re he does is and should be regarded a
az confidential, and his maps and note
ne belong to the company. He has no rign
" TO divulge to others the HI
obtained while in the employ Of a com
pany, Mr.. Macfarlane said he ha'
>, found some copies of the RaTus surve.
,t- notes In the Montana ore Purchasinl
US office. but he has never been able I
III find even copies of the Glengarry. Cop
. les of notes are never as complete an
valuable as the originals. When IN
witness left the Anaconda company a.
the notes, maps and drawings etc. n
had made during seven years OF ms en-
y gagement he left with the company
THE witness said he demanded tn
G~lengarry notes from Batterman, an
the latter told him IL he would deposi
sos he would have them copied. IN
It witness told him that was not neces
Nv sary. as ne considered the original more
no the property OF the NJ. o. +. company.
" q. w. Kingsbury testified that he ha'
a lease on the Harrington mine an
worked II through the lengarr mine
Batterman was not satis1ed with IN
work lone and told Kingsbury that n
was superintendent of the VI. %. 4
and Il. & NJ. companies. and that n
would see that he got out OF the lease
That closed the testimony for tn
plaintiff. and Attorney Marshall mad
a motion for a non-suit as 70 the 4
a NJ. company, on the grounds ina
the evidence did not show that IN
company had possession OF the prop
erty in controversy. or that II had an,
knowledge of the acts of Battermar
or that II was in any way responsible
Tn. court overruled the motion.
John +. Forbis. in making a state
ment to the jury for the defense. sal
the whole case was nothing but q per
sonal fight made by the plaintiff be
cause the could not retail
Batterman In its employ. and was nov
trying TO injure him In the communlt
e and blacken his character. Batterma
- betrayed no trust, and notwithstandin
the hsmmering OF the NJ. o. y. com
pany and Heinze he stood on his dig
nifty and treated his employer as y
should be treated by an employe. NJ
\ Forbis said there was no reason wh
y. Batterman should be abused. He no
only gave the NJ. O. =. company VIVA
Il was entitled 10, but preserved II
secrets in his own breast. He has n
interests in any Of the suits betwee
the two companies. He has not onl
been treated uniustly but in an un
manly manner. lie acted as any oths
person would have acted under IN
circumstances
Mr. Battermsn was her put on IN
witness stand. and after telling abor
his career az a mining engineer and e,
pert, Mr.. Forbis asked him a Generi
question as to his relations with Heinz
Batterman was loaded with a bunc
OF typewriter manuscript. which ev