The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1898-05-17
One of the Cases Between the
NJ. O. p. and the B. b NJ.
A ROAD FROM THE RARUS
The Erection OF the Proposed Buildings
Would Neceesitate a Longer Haul
to the Smelter-Taken Under
Amusement.

CdStS ttNtt NV ~
chasing company and the Butte &
Boston. In the pending case. the ore
is the plaintiff and seeks to
have a permanent injunction issued re-
straining the Butte a. Boston from
constructing certain proposed build
on a road that has been used as a
highway for several years. and which
leads from the Rarus mine to the
Heinze smelter at Meaderville. The
road is over the surface ground of the
Michael Dewitt and Pennsylvania. John
j. Mediation appeared for the plain
tiffs and w. ii. Dewitt n John +.
Forbis for the defendants.
Quite a number of witnesses were ex-
amined. most of them being teamsters
and ore haulers who had known the
vicinity since 1880. Joseph Nadeau was
one of the principal of this class of
witnesses. The roa in dispute had
not been known until 1898 and then it
was laid out under the direction of the
witness. the purpose being to haul ore
from the Rarus to the smelter. II had
au outlet to Walkerville and had been
used for other purposes. 1t was the
only practical route between the Rarus
and the smelter. but ore could be
hauled over a longer and more objec-
tionable route. Two other teamsters
testified to the same effect as Mr.. Ma
deau and added that there was no 9TH
er reason for the road than to haul the
Rarus ore.
MIR. Inns of Johnson & Bosth-
wick. testified that he had not known
of a trace of the road before 1898. He
knew but little about it, as he had usu-
ally used the south or old road.
A map prepared by the defendants,
showing the road. was introduced.
and also a map made by United
States typographical officers in 1885.
The latter map showed the disputed
piece of road as a county road.
Ben l.. Jacobs testified that he had
known the old or south road since 1886
and that the new had not been laid
out until 1895.
one of the former owners of the Ra-
rus testified that he had sold to
Heinze i'm 1894, and thai the disputed
road was made after that m Up
to that time the south road was always
used for hauling ore.
C.. s. Batterman of the Butte & Bos-
ton testified tina if the injunction was
maintained his company would be COM
PEELED to abandon it's shaft. The loca-
ton selected for the buildings was the
most suitable and eligible for the pur-
pose of the Butte e. Boston, 1t
was the intention to expend s2'o ~ Sa'
in their construction. He said the NJ.
O. y. company might be subjected to
a little inconvenience, but would suf-
fer no damage by the erection of the
buildings at the point selected. Be
sides this. his company had arranged
to furnish another means for the NJ. o.
T.. company to haul Its ores. This
would be done by building a road UNI
der the ~trestle. The distance would be
but little longer and the grade o
the same. Witness was asked what
assurance he would give that the road
would not be INSTRUCTED and answered,
"None at ALL" Mr.. Forbis asked II the
plaintiff wanted a bond, and Judge NC
uatton said, Yes, by all means.
Mr.. Batterman said that for years
the NJ. o. p. people had used the d. d
NJ. property without interruption and
had imposed upon them. He denied
the right of any one to use their prop
erty without their consent.
william Robbins. an engineer of the
Butte g. Boston. testified that he had
made the location for the proposed
buildings and that il was the only
available site. He said that IT the
buildings were erected 1t might cause
the Rarus TO make a little longer haul
to the smelter. but beyond that would
not damage them.
Arthur +. Heinze, who had previous
~ testified. was recalled, and said that
after he had been notified that the
work of excavation had begun he had
called at the office of Mr.. Forbis 10
consult about the matter. Mr.. Forbi
was at Helena and he had talked with
his partner, Mr.. Evans. h was "a
hours before the injunction proceeding
was begun. He also testified i'm re-
- - IL. IA,x-sa far tho nNss4 NAtinn
This closed the testimony and the
case was argued by Mediation for
the plaintiff and Dewitt and Forbis
for the defendants and taken under adj
visement by the court.
The case of William Burton vs.. Silas
T.. King was on motion dismissed with
out prejudice.
The case of Eliza NJ. Codding VS.
Catherine Evans was called and "A Jur!
empaneIed. This is the case in which
damages are demanded for alleged vio-
lation of a lease of a boarding house
A curious feature of the case Is that
the lease contains "A provision that II
expires June Z. 1895. but that If the de
PENDANT found il impossible to surrend-
er the premises at That date n was
To he allowed a reasonable time. The
testimony for the plaintiff was com
pleted NneU COURT duJoui Z
Marriage licenses were issued yes
terday to Frank Hadley and Lottie
smith and Peter Barrenstein and Hat
tie johnson, all of Butte.
Thrasher a. Bishop yesterday filed q
claim in the district court in behalf 81
Ebert Hin. The man was detained ar
"A witness for 81 days in the case al
the state VS.. George Baum, and M
claims fees amounting to ss?. The
case of the state vs.. Charles OBan
Mon and Kate Thomas against N
informations have been filed in con
nection with the alleged criminal as
sault on little Lizzie Perry. was called
in department two yesterday. OBan'
Mon entered a plea of not guilty anc
the woman was given further time IN
which To plead.
An appeal case of the city of Butte
VS.. Frank Call was heard before Judg'