The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1898-05-29
DECISIONS RENDERED.
One in Favor and Two Against the Mon
tana Ore Purchasing Company.

One In Favor and Two Against the Mon
tana Ore Purchasing Company.
Judge Lindsay yesterday rendered
three decisions in suits between the
Montana Ore Purchasing company and
the Boston mining companies, two grow
ing out of the reservoir and water fun
line trouble. the first controversy aris-
ing between the warning mining compa-
MES, the other being the road obstruc-
ton injunction case. In one case the
decision Is in favor of the Montana Ore
Purchasing company and I'm the other
two cases the judgment is against that
corporate 4. The first case decided Is
entitled the Montana ore Purchasing
company VS.. Boston e. Montana Con-
solidated Copper and Silver Mining COM
pany ct al. The court said, In passing
on the case, tina. il f1f heard and con-
sidered the testini.Ly introduced on the
trial in connection with the lease be-
tween the plaintiff and the defendants
predecessors I'm interest, and the con-
struction of the lease by the supreme
court, and found that the defendants,
Boston Il Montana Consolidated Copper
and Silver Mining company and others,
committed a trespass in attempting to
construct a box fiume through the rail-
road ~embankment described i'm the COM
plant. and that the defendants ought to
be perpetually enjoined from i'm any
INV WIN
destroying said embankment. and from
making any opening through the same
for the purpos of placing a Hume
therein; that the plaintiff have judg-
ment against the defendants for 81 dam
ages and costs of suit, and that the
defendants be enjoined accordingly;
that the right and privilege claimed by
the plaintiff under the agreement of the
lease to construct and maintain a ditch
or fiume upon and Over that portion of
mineral application No. $50, described in
the complaint. is denied.
The title of the second case decided
was THE Butte 4 Boston Consolidated
Mining company VS.. the Montana Ore
Purchasing company" and the court
finds that the defendant is not, under
the provisions of the lease existing be-
tween the predecessors in interest of the
plaintiff and the defendant, entitled to
construct or maintain a ditch, fiume or
pipe line upon and over that parcel of
ground designated as mineral applica-
ton No. 6S5, for the purpose of con-
Quoting water from Park canyon to the
reservoir of the defendant. ituated upon
said mineral application; that the con
structiol of such ditch. ilume or pipe
line, would impose an additional burden
upon the premises, not warranted by the
terms of said lease: hat the plaintiff
has been damaged by the attempt of
TO construct Sucn ultcn OF
fume in the sum of 81, and that the
defendant be enjoined accordingly, and
that the plaintiff have judgment in said
sum. together with its costs.
The court also decided the injunction
case of TIE NJ. o. Il. company against
the Butte * Boston. The temporary re-
straining order Heretofore issued re-
straininy end enicining the defendants
from in any amer e~xcavating upon
or ob~strucIinE the roadway leading from
the maia IcG1 between Butte n Mead
erville to the Rarus mine was ordered
dissolved. and the court denied the tenn
porary injunction prayed for by the
plaintiff.
The petition of the Butte & Boston
company to have the Larkin suit re-
moved TO the United States court for
trial was heard by Judge Clancy yes
terday afternoon. John Forbis appear
ing for the company and John j. Nc
Hatton for Larkin and his guardian in
opposition to the petition. Judge Clancy
heard the matter and then took it un-
der Amusement.