The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1898-09-23
HIS Wife FINISHED IT
Mr.. Schneider Was Restrained
From Building by the Court.
MRS. SCHNEIDER WASN'T
So She Went Ahead and Completed the
House-Mr. Schneider Now Wants
Permission to Go HON and
Live With His Family.

The Injunction case of Charles Col
bert and others against John Schneider,
in which IL was alleged that the de-
fendant had treated the courts order
with contempt, was up again peiore
Judge Lindsay yesterday for further
hearing. Schneider was put on the WI
ness stand and claimed that the oruer
of the court. restraining him from com
Melting a building which he started 10
erect or the Emery placer. the proper
ty of the plaintiffs, was not served on
him until after the house had been mn
ished and his wife had moved into the
building. He denied that he employed
anv one 10 work on the house after
the restraining order had been served
on him. and said that he had no notice
Of the order until a day or TWO AFTER
il had been served on the contractor;
Mrs. Schneider testified that she
moved into the new house without the
knowledge of her husband. She first
went down to the house 10 nan up
some windows and found some children
pla with fire at the house, and she
made up her mind that she had PETER
move into il and tax care OF H. She
said she furnisher the money with
which to build the house and thai she
claimed the property as her own. When
her husband came home in the evening
and found that she had moved into the
new house she was verv angry. On
cross-examination Mrs. Schneider sald
her husband. upon whom the courts
order was served, had nothing TO do
with Il. She did il all. She employed
the carpenters to finish the house and
assumed all responsibility and blame.
other witnesses testified that Mrs.
Schneider was the head of the Schnei-
der household and they had heard her
say h she was going TO build a
house. She had the stuff before she
took Schneider in.
In rebuttal Contractor kaempfer tes-
tilted that when the restraining order
was served on him he informed Schnei-
der Of the fact, and Schneider went and
consulted his lawyer, and when he re-
turned he wanted the witness to put
another carpenter to work In ms place
as he could in that wa" avoid the
courts restraining order. Kaempfer
said he worked for Schneider and not
for Mrs. Schneider.
A the conclusion of the testimony on
the contempt matter the court said II
did not consider the evidence sufficient
to show that there had been a violation
of the order by the defendant. The
Injunction matter was then taken up
and Charles Colbert, one Of the plain
tifs. testified that he had located the
ground known as the Emery placer
and which Schneider jumped and relo-
Gated as the Augusta Fraction lode
claim. away DUCK III lF'of dlu a ''Ni
in continuous possession of ii eve
since. The location was made unde'
the local law then in existence, and n
1850, the witness, a mar named Emer,
and George II. Tong relocated il unde
the federal law, each locator taking ?
acres. Colbert said he had done $40
worth of work or the ground ever
year since 1866. and that last year h,
had a man working on 1t for 100 lays
and the ground was not open 10 reloca
ton. He located the same ground IL
1858 as the Protection lode claim t
r prevent others from jumping il as
quartz lode claim. Colbert said hi
title to the ground had always bee
recognized. He had sold riEhts-of-wa
y to three railroads and each recognize
his right Of title and paid him for tn
ground. The witness said he did no
d know when Schneider had made his lc
q cation and also said there were a nun
: Der of people living on the ground VIII
did not pay him rent.
Deputy County Clerk and Recordt
- Simmons was called as a witness an
- produced an affidavit Of annual repre-
sentation work done on the EmeT
placer for Mr.. Colbert by John VOL
/ heater, who worked 107 days and pei
p formed work TO the value of S3745
= Wolfbeater testified that the require
y. work was done on the Emery in 19
e 1896 and 1897 to his own knowledg
Ie Other witnesses testified that ne
4, worked on the claim all summer
y each year.
c. The defense read afidavits made I
m Jacob Aho. John Brown, John Seine
l. der, Fred Shassberger and Abraha
p Neim. to the effect that no represel
IA tation work had been done on 4
Emery placer or Protection lode clal
E. in the last two years.
Attorney Lippincott, for the plaintiff
and j. NJ. Hinkle. for the defendaI
discussed the testimony and the Ia
Mr.. Hinkle said he did not care to ha
-. the injunction dissolved, but desired
y have it modified so that Schneider cou
go to his home and live with his fam
n and to protect his property. The jud
ne announced that he would pass on I
III matter on Saturday.
he