The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1898-02-24
An Abrupt Termination to B. C.
w. Evans Trial.
JURY TURNED HIM LOOSE
The Prosecution Was Unable to Produce
It's Witnesses and Judge Knowles
Instructed the Jury for
Acquittal

and Evans was turned loose by the jury
rendering verdict of acquittal in COM
pliance with instructions from Judge
Knowles.
The case was continued Monday after.
noon on the statement of United States
District Attorney Leslie that he had an
important witness whose attendance he
desired to procure. The witness was
John Bull, who Is supposed to be the
John Doe mentioned in the indictment
under which Evans was being prosecut-
ed. Governor Leslie received Informal
ton Monday that it might be possible to
get Bull. but when court convened yes
terday morning Governor Leslie stated
that he had been disappointed in his ex-
pectations with regard to the witness he
| expected to produce and announced that
the government would close
Attorney Alex Laist. counsel for the
defendant. moved that all testimony
| tending to show a conspiracy between
| Evans and Fagen- Bush be stricken
from the evidence in the case on the
! ground that it had not been shown that
the transactions between the complain
| ing witness, John Woods, and Fagen-
| Bush had been carried on through the
! mails and that therefore NE letter from
| Evans did not show that the mails had
/ been used by Evans and Fagen- Bush To
| further a conspiracy.
/ Judge Knowles sustained the motion,
thereby multiplying the governments
| case. Attorney Laist then moved that
| the court instruct the jury to return a
| verdict of not guilty and Judge Knowles
| complied. Without leaving their seats
| the jurymen submitted the verdict as
directed and in less than an hour from
the converting of court The defendant
Evans was discharged from custody ana
walked forth from the cours room a
free man.
Judge Knowles commented pontedly
on the result of the trial while inform
ing Evans he was a free man.
You are discharged but not Vindi-
Gated, said he. Il have strong suspic-
lens, Mr.. Evans, that you are a guilty
man and that you were in the scheme
to defraud. but ii is a Scotch verdict.
not proven. and you may consider your
self exceedingly lucky and take great
deal of comfort in the fact that you es-
caned.''
Evans has been confined in the county
JAN since the 18th of last September |
having been unable to secure bondsmtn |
at thetime of his indictment. When in /
formed that he was at liberty to go he |
showed the pleasure he felt at getting |
out of jail.
United States District Attorney Leslie
asked that the bonds of Fagen- Bush be |
declared forfeited, which was granted.
Governor Leslie intimated at the close
of the case that he still had something
up his sleeve in connection with the +
Fagen-Bush-Evans matter which he
might bring up later but gave no in
timation as to what il was.
The case of the Montana Power COM
pany against Peter X. Dolman, Eugene
Carver and Carroll Dolman occupied the
attention of the court during the after
noon session, the defendants winning the
.,E |
land on the Big Hole river, which the
plaintlf seeks to acquire for reservoir
purposes, by the court dismissng the
motion of plaintiffs attorney asking for
an order directing that the plaintiff be
permitted to prospect the ground in
question
The ground which furnishes the bone
OF conteation comprises 256 acres of land
extending up the river from the Mon
tana Power cnmpany's dam and in
Guides the Big Hole placer mining claim
ana about half the area of the Helen,
Mamie ID. and Matte quartz lode
claims. The plaintiff lays claim to the
ownership of the land sets up that 1t
IS not mineral land and claims it is en-
titled to possession, which the Defend
ants deny, so far as it includes the Big |
Hole placer and those portions of the
luartz lode claims referred to-
Inc plaintin, claiming the ground is
not mineral land, came into court on the
Ioth or the month with an affidavit of
Mr.. Turner. one of the officers of the
plaintiff company, alleging such was the .
,ase and asking for an order directing
nat the plaintiff be permitted to make
/ survey and examination of the prop
'rty to ascertain whether or not it was I
mineral land. The court made an order /
iirecting the defendants to show cause
Why such survey and examination
hould not be made.
The case came up yesterday afternoon I
N motion of counsel for the defend
-nts to dismiss the proceedings. which {
vas argued by Judge E N Harwood !
nd F. T. Mcbride for the defendants :
nd j. +. Forb.s for the plaintiff
Inc attorneys for the defendants con-
ended that the plaintiff had not shown
UGH an interest in the property as 10 q
ntitle ii to an order TO either insnect or ,
urvey the land further: that no law :
warranted the making of an order per-
littlng an adverse claimant to prospect
claim located by and In the possession Q
I another. 4
The attorney for the plaintiff held that
nder the United States statutes the
laintiff was permitted to use the public y
oman as a reservoir site and that In z
ne event the land in dispute was not
lbject to mineral entry IL should be 4
nbject To use by the plaintiff as a res. =
rEoir site.
Mr.. Forbis further contended that the
atute save the court of equity iuris-
lotion to make an order allowing an 2
lVerse claimant 10 public lands to en- q
n and prospect the same. a
Judge Knowles overruled the motion 4
dismiss and the attorneys for the de- :
'ndants filed their answer to the order v
show cause. In which they set up that =
le several quartz lode claims mentioned q
ere located in 1892 and the Big Hole d
acer claim in May. 1885,, by the de- :
prior 10 the organization of =
Montana lar
ficers Of said company mad suhsa. o
Iently made locations Of several placer .
lining claims adjoining the Big Hole =
aeer claim, affirming that the ground =
as valuable as mineral land: that the =
hcefs Of the company also located thu v
.ound comprising the Big Hole claim q
ID affirmed that ii was valuable az d
acer ground