The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1899-03-07
The Boston & Montana Receiv-
ership Matter.
A STAY OF PROCEEDINGS
Arguments Made ana Decision Reserved.
a New Rule Adopted by the
Justices in Order to Expe-
- dfte Business.

upon another phase of the Boston &
Montana receivership matter. The
proposition presented to the court was
| whether the remittitur in the case de-
cided last Monday, when the court held
that Judge Clancy had jurisdiction to
appoint a receiver could be held back
any longer. thereby staying the appoint
ment of receiver pending the outcome
of the proceeding commenced before
Judge Clancy to dismiss the receiver
The motion to dismiss the receiver will
be heard by Judge Clancy Thursday
Until that proceeding has been finally
settled the Boston & Montana attorneys
naturally desire a stay in the proceed
ings looking to the receiver taking hold.
Ransom Cooper of Great Falls and ex-
Governor Carpenter of Helena appeared
for the Boston & Montana and j. j.
Mediation and Governor Smith in oppo-
sition to further stay of proceedings
The court will announce its decision in
| the morning.
The attorneys for the Boston & Mon
tana to-day obtained from the supreme
court an order for the Montana Ore
Purchasing company to show cause
why its officers should not be punished
for contempt of court in continuing to
extract ore from the Pennsylvania lode
In the face of an injunction. The order
was made returnable March 8. The
court announced that it would hereafter
write very brief opinions in all cases.
except where some new and important
rule Is to be applied. If case is to
be affirmed or reversed upon the ques-
ton of sufficiency or insuffieiency of the
evidence to support the verdict or judg-
ment there will be no review of the
testimony in the opinion and decision to
| be filed. The reason announced for this
contemplated change is that greater
progress may be made toward clearing
| the calendar 1t is but half of the labor
| of the justices to reach a conclusion in
most cases; the other half is the care
and work expended upon the opinion.
which. as is well known, is incorporated
| in the official reports. In many ap-
peals, though, no new principle is APP
piled and no point discussed of value
| to the profession at large, yet the time
and effort to prepare the opinions in
| these cases is nearly as great as in cases
| presenting novel and unusual matters.
In the future appeals of this unimport-
ant class will be disposed of by brief
| memorandum opinions or decisions
1t is also announced that counsel will
hereafter be held ITO strict observance
| of the rules requiring a statement or
abstract of the case in the briefs, or
| their appeals will not be considered. The
judges say they find that considerable
of their time Is frequently spent in as
certaining what is the case presented
for decision. The duty of counsel to
give to the court lucid and proper
| abstract has been commented upon in
! several opinions recently filed; so that
in this respect warning has been
given. The new departure outlined is
made necessary by the heavy work Of
| the court. but 1t Is believed that excel
lent results will follow, and that the
| lawyers will approve Of the plan as,the
only one by which the court can per-
| form the task before it of catching up
with its calendar. At all events it is to
be put into operation upon the lines of
many older states, where it is said to be
highly satisfactory.
Three opinions were rendered to-day,
as follows:
Katherine l.. Ming VS.. Charles H.
Pratt. This suit was brought in 1895
| by the plaintiff, who at that time owned
the Ming opera house, against Pratt for
| breach of contract. Pratt was the
manager of the Marie Tavary Grand
English Opera company The company
was engaged by the plaintiff to play in
Helena one night. They failed to keep
their engagement and this suit was the
| resSIlt. Judge Blake tried the case and
gave plaintiff s127.5o damages. Defend
ant appealed. The contract between the
| parties had this provision in it: ut Is
| agreed that Charles H. Pratt, manager
of the said Marie Tavary opera COM
| pany, is guaranteed to receive as his
share not less than $3.50 and IS per cent.
| on all money received in the sale of
seats for said engagement" This was
| interpreted by the trial judge as mean
| ing a guarantee of $3.50 or IS per cent.
! ns,@f- r.rff ,,
| per curiam opinion holds that this
| clause is not susceptible of such an in
| terpretation: its language is clear. and
that a court cannot put meaning to
the language of a contract so as to alter
| its provisions. The case is reversed and
remanded for new trial.
Walter J. King VS.. N. f. Benson
King as assignee of an account for COM
missions for services as real estate
broker claimed to have been performed
by s. w. Langhorne in the sale of a
mine, brought this action against Ben
son in the district court of Meagher
county. AT the close of plaintiffs proof
defendant moved a non-suit for the
reason that the evidence failed to show
any contract of employment between
Benson and Langhorne. and because
there was no memorandum in writing of
the alleged employment as required by
law in a case where one undertakes to
sell land Tor another. The district court
refused the non-suit The defendant
appealed. The supreme court in an
opinion per curtain reverses the lower
court. holding that the evidence clearly
shows that instead of employing Lang
horne, defendant, in letters, told him
plainly that If he brought about sale
of the mine he would have to look to
the parties who bought 1t for his COM
pensation. 1t is held, however, that
the plaintiff cannot recover under any
circumstances, because no memorandum
of any contract for such services had
been put in writing, as provided by
section PISS of the civil code
John Caplice company VS.. M. Beau
champ-This was an action for the re-
covery of some six carloads of wood
| A verdict was rendered for defendant;
plaintiffs motion for new trial was
denied, hence this appeal. Justice Hunt
| for the court affir1ns the district court