The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1899-03-10

discharged for the reason that there is
not sufficient evidence that any of
them had hisobeyed said injunction
and it is further ordered that the pro-
eeeding as against F. August Heinze be
and the same is hereby continued to be
heard on such day as the court may
hereafter appoint for that purpose and
thereafter and at the hour of 4 O'Clock
in the afternoon the Montana Ore Pur-
chasing company and said A. P. Heinze
pay into the clerk of this court the sum
of $780, the fine imposed for their sew
eral contempts; and it appearing that
the said company and said Heinze have
desisted from violating said injunction
it is ordered that they be discharged.
1t is further ordered, that the costs of
this proceeding be deducted from the
amount of the fines and that the re-
mainder be delivered to the state treas
urer to be by him disposed of accord
ing to law"
The decision of the court was as fol-
lows:
The court, after looking into this mat
ter. have come to this conclusion. That
this lease executed from the Johnstown
and Montana Ore Purchasing company
was designed in the first place to enable
the defendant companies to evade the
process of the district court of Butte,
and that since the 2nd day of March it
has been used by the Montana Ore Pur-
chasing company and the lessees. that
is the active lesseas, for the purpose of
evading the process of this court. The
lease as appears under the proof was
not designed as lease in good faith to
start with, but it was executed for the
purposes that we have indicated and
that it has been used for those purpos-
es. The proof does not justify the con-
clusion, whatever inference may be
drawn from it. that the Youngstown Min
ing company and it's agent, Mr. War
field, have been actively engaged or
have assisted in any way in evading
the process of this court, but whatever
offense they have committed in the way
of contempt has been in contempt of
the process of the district court Of
Butte. Their connection with the mat
ter since that time has not been active
in any way, and whatever purpose the
lease has served since the time it was
executed was by the other parties. that
is, by the Montana Ore Purchasing
company. We have reached the con-
'clusion that under the facts in this case,
in this proceeding, it is perfectly clear
that it really executed this lease to
evade the process of this court; that it
appears here from the proof that the
Montana Ore Purchasing company is
still really engaged in working those
mines through it's own employees, their
machinery, their shaft. their smelter.
their foreman, their shift boss, their
mine clerk, and their property is en-
gagged in that business, and the COM
pany is profiting by it, and the design
was to bring about just that condition
of things so that they might technically
avoid the injunction that was issued by
this court. 1t Is therefore adjudged
that the Montana Ofe Purchasing conn
pany is guilty of contempt, and that its
officers and directors are, and that eN-
cept as to August F. Heinze. whose
connection with this matter we VIII
continue for future investigation, and
who is now sick that this company be
fined in the sum of $500, and that Ar
thur P. Heinze be fined in the sum of
$3.50 and that the president and direc-
tors of the Montana Ore Purchasing
company be committed to Jail until
they have satisfied this court that they
have complied with this order. except
as to August F. Henze.
By the court-Now as to who those
officers are, except Mr. Heinze, we will
take the statement of counsel as to their
names. so that the process of this court
may run.
BY Mr.. Cotter-I don't know anything
about that
By the court-We will let the order
stand as it is, but We would like to
know the officers.
BY Mr. Evans-Mr. Arthur P. Heinze
can state in full. he Is the secretary,
and Mr.. Maginnis is vice-president
BY Mr.. Arthur p. Heinze-Mr Ma
ginnis and myself are the only officers
besides my brother.
BY the court-And we will add further
to the judgment that the Lewis and
Clarke county jail be the place of con-
finement Now as to Mr.. Maury and
Mr. Warfield and their connection with
this matter as | say, the proof does not
justify finding against the JohnstoWn
company or Mr.. Warfield. but in this
connection we wish to say that they
must not do it any more: they are dis
missed with the injunction that they
are dangerously near the line, and as
to Mr.. Maury we have this to say, that
he comes very near getting into trouble
himself, and we enjoin upon him as
younger member of the profession that
counsel ought to be careful in these
matters, and in offering advice. and not
be connected with any scheme what
ever it may be to avoid the process of
the court We have no further CON-
ment to make upon his conduct