The Anaconda standard., 1899-04-16

date directing Clancy to hear the mo-
tlon to discharge the receiver and he
finally took the matter up on the 1st of
April, and while the hearing was going
on issued a writ of assistance, order
ing the sheriff to place Receiver Kinds
in possession. When the Boston & Mon
tana people heard of this latest move
they prepared to defeat it's purpose by
closing down all the mines in Butte and
the smelter at Great Falls, and armed
guards were placed over the proper
ties. The receiver still failed to get
possession, and Judge Clancy issued
warrants for the arrest of a number of
the company's officers, and contempt
proceedings were instituted against the
attorneys. The officers, however, elud-
ed arrest, but the attorneys We're cited
for contempt for presumably advising
the defendant and their agents to re-
SiSt the receiver and oppose the order
of the court Another appeal was made
to the supreme court to stay the receiv-
err, but it refused to interfere upon the
showing made by the defendants, and
that having been their last recourse the
attorneys for the defendants interrupts
ed the proceedings before Judge Clancy,
on the Sth of this month, to announce
that no further resistance would be Of
fered the receiver and that he could
take possession of the property. A SEN
sational court scene followed One of
the attorneys for the defendant spoke
his mind plainly to the court and said
the defendants felt that they had not
received justice, and that their property
had been taken from them by the court
without having given them their day
in court. Judge Clancy replied excited
ly and accused the attorneys of having
acted in bad faith because of their nu-
merous appeals to the supreme court.
He told them that if they had been
S-tr tt,nyY Ni-ne- n,,1I
have decided the property back without
appealing from his decisions. He claim
ed that the supreme court had sus-
tanned him in eVerything. Two days
later Judge Clancy overruled the mo-
tion to discharge the receiver, and told
the attorneys that they had no standing
in court as the defendants had been in
contempt ever since the 18th of last
December, when the receiver was ap
pointed, Notwithstanding the fact that
the supreme court had granted a stay.
The Receiver on Deck.
The next event in the case was the
effort of the receiver to operate the
property. which was rendered fI-uitless
by reason of the refusal of the Great
Northern Railway company to haul ore
and supplies for him, and before he
could invoke the aid of the courts
against the railroad the supreme court
had acted on another motion for a stay,
which had been made after Clancy's re-
fusal to discharge the receiver. and an
indefinite stay was granted and the re-
ceiver ordered to surrender possession
of the property to the defendant com
pany upon the latter filing n bond IN the
sum of $500 to secure Forester and
MacGinniss against damage. The bond
was signed and approved within a few
hours and the Boston &, Montana came
into its own again, and will probably
remain so. The plaintiffs, who at pres
ent own but $50 shares of stock between
them. would appear to be amply pro-
tected by the $250,000 bond, whatever
the result of the accounting between
the New York and Montana companies
may be. NleGinniss still owns his 100
shares, but Forester has transferred
so of his shares to Burdette O'Connor.
a law clerk in his office, in whose name
another suit has been brought against
the Boston &. Montana. asking not only
for the appointment Of a receiver, hut
also for dissolrti"n of the corpora
| tion and a sale of its properties. 1t is
not likely, however, in view of the re-
| suit of the Forester case. that the
OConnor suit will be pushed.
! 1t is generally conceded, even by some