The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1898-05-04

ANSWER TO THE ORDER
Mr.. Battermau. the Company's Engineer.
Files an Amdavit in Which the
Plans and Purposes Of ths 3.
d n. Are Fully Sst Forth.

continuing work on the Johnstown
vein. alleged to be in dispute. and yes
terday the defendant company made a
return on the order to show cause. II
claims that il has never. and does not
intend to take ore from any vein in the
ownership of which there Is the slight
est doubt, I'M is not working on any
vein to which the Montana Ore Pur-
chasing company lays any claim. The
injunction. therefore, serves to prevent
the Boston and Montana from working
in u~ndisputed ground, and will result
in the necessity Of closing down q large
part of their Pennsylvania mine. The
Boston and Montana answer is con-
tanned in an affidavit made by c. s.
Batterman. the company's engineer.
Batterman says in his affidavit that
he Is we'll acquainted with the work.
ings of the defendant company, which
has been n now is working the e
sylvania lode claim n the ground
south thereof. and which ground is in
controversy In the suit. He says he is
also well acquainted with the ground
claimed by the Montana Ore Purchas-
ing company, being a portion of the
YOUNGSTOWN n Pennsylvania lode
claims. He a y the veins upon which
the defendant is working in the Penn
sylvania lode are situated a consider
able distance from the ground claimed
by the plaintiff company. the nearest
vein from which the defendant il ex-
tracing ore being 900 feet south of the
side line of the plaintiffs ground.
There are several other veins between
that vein and the north side line of the
Pennsylvania, and at least one vein
south of the vein on which the de-
fondap M &c vninin0 The vain On u,h;ch
the defendant is mining is called vein
No. 3; according to the dip of each n
all of the veins all of them apex i'm
he Pennsylvania claim except No. 3.
which will. il IL maintains its dip, apex
in the south side of the Pennsylvania
or south of that claim. In the opinion
of Batterman there is no possibility
that any of the veins will apex in the
ground of the NJ. O.. p. Co. and there
is no working whatever to show any
indication that the plaintiff has any
part of the apex of the vein, and the
developments show conclusively that
none of the veins apex within the
ground owned by the plaintiff. Bat
terman says the defendant is not work.
ing upon any of the veins within the
Pennsylvania claim or elsewhere, al
though the veins do depart from a per-
pendicular. from the ground claimed by
the plaintiff into and nder the Penn
sylvania. So far as the affiant knows
or has been informed, the plaintiff has
never heretofore claimed the owner
ship of the veins from which the de-
fendant has been extracting ore with
i'm the Pennsylvania or south thereof.
and so far as n development shows,
there is no possibility that the apices
OF the vein or any part of them lie in
the YOUNGSTOWN lode claim, or of the
part owned by the plaintiff. The veins
upon which the defendant Ii mining
have varying dips, n the line which
has been fixed in the injunction in
this case of 40 degrees from the hori-
zontal, drawn through the north side
line of the Pennsylvania claim. inter-
cepts n cuts each and every one of
the veins upon which the defendant is
mining at some depth, for the reason
hat mons of the veins have a dip
which lis not sleeper than 20 degrees
from the horizontal, and as a result of
the injunction the defendant is en-
Joined from working upon any of the
veins, whether the apex be within the
plaintiffs ground or not.
Up to the time of the issuance of the
injunction the defendant was extract
ing from the veins lying entirely south
of any veins owned or claimed by the
plaintiff, large quantities of ore, the
exact mount of which is unknown to
the affiant. but probably about 200 tons
a day, n if the injunction is contin-
ued IL will necessitate the closing down
of the Pennsylvania mine at all points
below the line specified in the injunc-
ton. and IL will result in great dam
& to the defendant for the reason
that IL is necessary to pump the water
from the mine in order to preserve IL.
the cost of which will AMOUNT to about
81 .50Oa months, and which will become a
dead xpense to the company. Bat
terman further says hat north of the
Pennsylvania for a long distance the
ground is owned by the defendant and
h Anaconda company. The defend
ant has never mined on any vein that
has its apex in the plaintiffs ground.
but. on the contrary, has carefully
avoided interfering with any veins
which could possibly be in dispute be-
tween the plaintiff and the defend
ant, and there can be no question
whatever that the veins upon which
the defendant has been mining have
their apices in the plaintiffs ground.
It is claimed that the lines drawn up
on the surface and between which de-
PENDANT Is enjoined from working,
widely diveree in their course. and as
they extend south they rapidly diverge
and ioclude more and more ground.
The affiant further says that IL the
plaintiff claims all of the ground claim
ed In its complaint. n from working
which the defendant is enjoined. the
defendant disputes the right of plain
tiff thereto. and IL the plaintiff Intends
to mine any or all portion OF the ground
IL will he necessary for defendants to
prosecute actions to prevent the min
ing thereof in order TO protect It's in
terests. and IL the injunction Is to be
maintained IL will be destructive to the
rights of the defendants. and IL il
necessary for the protection of its
rights that IL be permitted to bring
such suits as may be required for the
protection of its property. The de-
PENDANT company also filed notice OF
intention to object to the suficiency OF
the plaintiffs bond on the injunction.