The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1899-12-21

and called another member of the bar,
and the latter testified that 5000 was
a reasonable fee, and that sum was
included in the judgment for the plain
tiff.
In the case of w. A. Clark ct al.
against p C. Hamil ct al, judgment
by default was entered. The judgment
was for $574 on a note and $1,000 costs.
Lawyer Lee tried to introduce the case
to the court before the. latter was
ready The court was writing, and Mr..
Lee said
"Will your honor hear any ex-parte
matters to-day?'
Don't interrupt the court" said
Judge Clancy, glancing up, and then
went on with his writing.
Mr.. Lee sat down, and presently the
court was ready.
Some motions came before the court
in the case of the Anaconda Copper
Mining company against F. August
Heinze, but they were continued TO
January g. Judge McHatten repre-
scented the defendant, and Lawyer Nc
Donald the plaintiff. The latter vas
anxious to have one motion heard. but
Judge McHatten was not ready, so
they argued the matter. Mr. McDon-
aid claimed that his client had fulfilled
all the preliminary requirements, and
court should proceed with the hearing.
Judge McHatten did not think there
was anything fair about it, and offered
opposition.
well, I know. I guess Mr.. McDon-
aid is very fair now. He may have
now. But I'll set the matter over to
the 9Th said the court.
A complaint was filed in the district
court yesterday in the suit of John
NJ. Trap and j. H. Trerise against the
Boston & Montana Mining company.
The suit is over the Lucky Star lode
claim The complaint says that the
plaintiffs are the owners of the claim
and are in possession of it. and that
it is quartz lode. 1t further says that
the defendant has asserted and claims
an interest or estate in the claim and
the veins and ore belonging to it. adj
verse to the plaintiffs. and that it has
no rights in the claim. and its asser-
tons and claims are wholly without
foundation in law and equity. and
throw a cloud upon the plaintiffs title
and interfere with their enjoyment of
the claim. The complaint alleges that
the defendants claims are founded
upon a number of locations of claims
or lodeS. adverse to the Lucky Star
location, and that one suit will rot
settle the plaintiffs title to the claim.
w l6FeIDTe Ine pidIllllIS ASK lldl the
defendant be required to set forth all
its adverse claims to the Lucky Star:
that the plaintiffs be adiudged to be
the owners of the claim; that the
claims of the defendant he adjudged
to be without right; that the plaintiffs
title be forever quieted against all
claims of the defendant and all per-
sons claiming through it. and that the
latter be forever enjOined from assert
ing any claim to the premises in G:s-
pute.
The case of the Butte Mining COM
pany against l.. Frank ct al. was post
poned to January 6, the case Of r. A.
Day against VIM. Lyons eft al. to De
cember 2S, and the case Of the NJ. O. p.
company against the Butte & Boston
company to January ,. 1900. A bill of
exceptions has been submitted by the
defendant to the plaintiff for amend
ments in the latter case. and this mat
ter will be settled January ,.
The contempt proceeding in the case
of J. H. Maloney ct al. against Silas
F. King ct al. was postponed to De-
cember IS: also other hearings on mo-
tons and orders in this case and in
the kindred case OF King ct al. against
Maloney ct al, involving the same par
ties. Wakeman Sutten, the Defendant