The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1899-09-29
PERMISSION IS GRANTED
To Make a Resurvey of the Ply
mouth Lode.
LOOKING FOR AN APEX
A Question of Contempt Which Was
Brushed Aside by Judge Clancy.
1t Was Bird of Another
Feather.

Judge Clancy has granted permits
sion to the defendants in the Silver
King mining case to make an examina-
ton and survey of shaft sunk by the
plaintiffs on the Plymouth lode claim.
The defendants are Silas F. King,
James A. Murray, James A. Talbot.
Marcus DAILY and Wakeman Sutton,
and the plaintiffs are ]. H. Maloney,
c. P. Drennen and others. The latter
are the owners of the Plymouth and
claim to own the apex of the rich vein
upon which the Silver King owners are
working and they secured an injunc-
ton restraining the defendants from
continuing the work. They then sunk a
shaft on what they claimed to be the
apex in the Plymouth, but now say
that it is on different vein and have
refused the defendants permission to
examine it. The defendants appealed
to the court and when the matter came
up for hearing both parties were pre-
pared with affidavits and numerous
witnesses to make hard fight, but
Judge Clancy cut the proceeding short,
intimating that after devoting weeks
to the great Pennsylvania case such a
matter as the Silver King controversy
appeared insignificant and like a joke.
When the motion came up for hear
ing, Attorney Shropshire, representing
the plaintiffs, asked for a continuance,
but the court refused to grant it, and
F. T. Mcbride, for the defendants
made statement as to the nature of
the petition. He said that since the
commencement of the suit the plain
tiffs had sunk shaft just south of
the north side line of the Plymouth for
the purpose of developing their claim;
that the apex of the vein in dispute is
in that ground, and the defendants de-
sired to make an examination and sur
vey of the shaft to determine for them
selves what was shown in it.
Mr.. Shropshire stated to the court
that it had recently came to the knowl-
edge of the plaintiffs that the defend
ants had violated the courts injunc-
ton order and that they were there
fore in contempt and not entitled to
any favors.
THAT has nothing to do with this"
said the court. IF they are in con-
tempt of court you can make proper
showing of it and we will do business
with them"
Wakeman Sutton, one of the defend
ants, testified that the Plymouth shaft
was sunk on what the plaintiffs claimed
was the apex of the vein in question,
but he could not say whether it was
or not until after a survey and eX-
I'd #F
In opposition to the motion Mr.
Shropshire read an affidavit by J. II.
Maloney and announced that he had
another affidavit and several witnesses
to present. Mr.. Maloney alleged that
the shaft in question was sunk on
vein which has its apex in the Ply
mouth ground and that the defendants
had already determined all the facts
they could by other examina tons and
development work Mr. Maloney also
said the defendants had violated the
injunction order and were therefore in
contempt of court and were not in
position to ask anything from the
court. He said Sutton had manifested
much ill will toward the plaintiffs and
that the object of his motion for sur
vey was to hinder and delay the 'plain
tiffs in their development work.
The court sustained motion of Mr..
Mcbride to strike from Maloney's afti-
davit all allegations about the defend
ants being in contempt of court be-
cause no charge of contempt had been
properly presented to the court.
I'm sustain the notion" said Judge
Clancy. TT shouldn't be in there. You
ought to know better than to put it
in; you are old enough to know bet
ter"
Mr. Shropshire tried to say some
thing but the court cut him short.
This proceedings looks like a joke on
the big case we have here in the day
time" continued the court. you've
got little lot of ground out here with
little daub of ore in 1t and it looks
like child's play"
Mr. Shropshire thought the court
should hear all the allegations and tas-
timony regarding the contempt.
Il won't hear it and | won't consider
it, and you might just is well drop it"
We'll if the court won't hear it, we
might just as well quit. for that is the
showing We have to make" said Mr..
Shropshire, and he did quit, and the
court signed Mr.. McBride's order for
survey. The plaintiffs also desired to
make a resurvey of portion of the
defendants workings in the ground in
controversy and Mr.. Mcbride consented
to It.