The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1899-05-06
Proceedings Against the B. & M.
Men Concluded.
WILL DECIDE IT TUESDAY
Judge Clancy Held That the Defendants
Must Testify-A General Refusal
to Answer-The Case Mar
rowed Down.

| GERS OF the Boston &. Montana Mining
company was concluded in Judge
Clancy's court yesterday and he an
! nounced that he would pass on tas
! question of the innocence or guilt of the
accused next Tuesday morning. At the
conclusion Of the testimony the case
seemed to have narrowed down to three
or four defendants, Attorney Mediation
| representing the prosecution practically
| admitted that there was no evidence
| against any one but Joseph H. Vivian
general agent of the company; Assist
ant Superintendent C. S. Batterman
and c. r. Davis, foreman of the Leon
ard mine, upon whom Receiver Kinds
had made a personal demand for the
possession of that property, and Mr..
Mediation asked that they be punished.
The case against General Manager
Hyams, who is in the East is yet to be
heard.
The hearing yesterday took on some
interest when the court ruled that the
defendants themselves could be exam
ined by the prosecution and an attempt
was made to make out a case against
them by their own testimony and their
refusal to testify on the plea that their
answers might tend to criminate them
selves. When court opened yesterday
morning Judge Clancy made a ruling
on the question whether the defend
ants could be compelled to testify. He
held that each could be compelled to-
testify against the ether but not
against themselves. He said he had
looked up the law on the question ard
while he was not fully satisfied whether
the proceeding was of a civil or crimi-
| nal nature, he had found a case report
ed in the second Missouri reports which
had an application to the case before
him. In the Missouri case four men
were summoned before the grand Jury
to give testimony relative to an illegal
game of faro. The first witness was
asked to tell whom he saw playing, but
to say nothing about himself He re-
fused to answer on the plea that it
| might tend to criminate himself. He
was sent to jail for contempt and on a
habeas corpus the court decided that
he must answer Judge Clancy said the
same rule was laid down by the United
States supreme court in the famous
case of Aaron Burr and he thought that
was the correct doctrine.
Joseph H. Vivian one of the defend
ants, who was on the witness stand
was asked by Mr.. Mediation if he knew
where G. S. Batterman, another defend
ant was from April / to April 15 Be
fore he answered another objection was
made by Mr.. Scallon and an argument
followed on the question of the scope
and limit to which the eXaminatio of
the witness could be carried. The re-
suit was that the court instructed the
witness that he could refuse to answer
any question, the answer, to which he
thought might incriminate him. The
question as to the whereabouts Of Bat
terman was then repeated and the wit
mes refused to answer.
why do you refuse to answer"
asked Mr.. Mediation.
"On the ground that it might tend to
eliminate myself" was the answer.
Has C. S. Batterman at any time
made any statement to you with refer
ence to his refusal to deliver the prop
erty of the Boston & Montana company
to the receiver appointed by this
court? ?"
ION the same ground as before | re-
fuse to answer said the witness
DO you state that your answer to
that question might tend to crmtnate
you in the charge now pending against
you in this court?"
Il do"
do you know whether the mines of
the Boston & Montana company We're
closed at any time after the LIST of April
on an order of C. S. Batterman?'
Il refuse to answer.
"Why do you refuse to answers
"On the same ground as before
THAT it might tend to criminate you
in the charge now pending against you
in this court?"
Yes, SIR
The witness was asked if Foremen
Davis and Dunshee had ever made Gny
statements with reference to the reason
certain mines We're closed during the
months of March and April, and he re-
piled that they had made no statements
to him about the matter at all.
DO you know where c. r. Davis was
from March 80 to April S?''
Il know nothing whatever as to his
whereabouts"
DO you know where Mr. Dunshee
was during that same period?''
II do not
DO you know where G. NJ Hyams
was during that time?''
Il refuse to answer"
Where were you during that time?"
Il refuse to answer
'Why?"
'On the same ground previously
stated, because it myight tend to Grim
mate myself"
What knowledge, if any, have you
as to whether w. Fl. Dewitt, John F.
For+bis or l.. o. Evans at any time ad-
vised any of the officers or employees of
the Boston & Montana company to re-
fuse to obey the order of the court ap-
pointing a receiver, or to decline to turn
the property bl the company over to
him."
Il decline to answer on the ground
that it might tend to criminate my
| self"
when, if ever, was the property
turned over to the receiver"
Il refuse to answer.
when did you return to Butte in
April?"
Il refuse to answer"
X
time?"
Il believe he is in Salt Lake City
Did G. NJ. Hyams state to you in
April that he had refused to turn the
property of the Boston 8E Montana COM
pany over to the receiver or that he
would not deliver it to him.
Il refuse to answer"
Did you see Thomas r. Kinds in the
office of the Boston & Montana com
pany on the 18th of December 1882"
4 refuse to answer"
Did you know that Thomas R. Kinds