Daily inter mountain. [volume] (Butte, Mont.) 1881-1901, 1899-04-05

Hardly tina many. Probably 5000"
Mr.. Muth also said that during the
period stated 1890 tons of ore had been
taken from the mines and shipped to the
Butte Smelter. OF this humble 1900 tons
We're first-class.
John MacGinnis, one of the plaintiffs in
the action, testified that even his expert
ence as a manage of business enterprises
and assistant manager for the Montana
Ore Purchasing company would not en-
able him to judge whether the contents
of the documents showing the transfer
of the property by the New York COM
pany to the Montana company were suffi-
cient in detail, the reason being that the
data was so Incomplete.
In what respect is it incomplete?"
I'm one instance the tonnage statement
of Mr.. Burns. The metallurgist state
ment of Mr.. Lang shows the production
of "a, 200, 900 pounds of copper at the Great
Falls smelter, of which 1900 tons of the
ore from which it was taken were first
class and 3 $1,000 tons second-class.
The witness went into detail in the
matter. He placed the cost of mining at
81 per ton; cost of freight to Great Falls,
rs cents; concentration, 40 cents per ton;
calcining, 80 cents per ton on a basis Of
80 cents per ton of concentrates; smelt-
ing, So, but the reduction by reason of
concentration made it less. The total
cost of treating a ton of ore was $4.47,
and a ton of Boston and Montana ore con-
tanned an average of ISL 2-10 pounds of
copper. The cost of converting and re-
timing was ~ cents per pound, and the
cost Of shipment to New York during the
open season 60 cents per 100 pounds; in
the closed season 20 cents.
Mr.. MacGinnis' figures further showed
that during the period between April 8
of last year and February 23 of this yea
the total excess or loss to the company
fnYnl1Oh Snn1n sinh hol0 nithor from mis-.
management or other cause, to have been
SO, 141 ,74O. He said copper from tirst-class
ore could be laid down in New York at
1884 per 100 pounds and from second
class $5.45. Mr.. Vivian's affidavit, he
said, showed the value of the metal
shipped east to a been $39S, 500, and
for this amount there had been no ac-
counting. The .aftidavits of Messrs.
Vivian, Long and Altmeyer combined
were not, he alleged, an accurate state
ment of the productions and results. The
Butte and Boston smelter was being
worked under lease by the Boston and
Montana company, but ore belonging to
the former was being treated in it. There
was nothing to show the dividing line be-
| tween the working of the ore owned by
the other, but at the Great Falls smelter
a different system prevailed.
Mr.. MacGinnis further said he would
be satisfied to have a competent man eX-
III III DOohS VI liz Company
THAT would necessitate the examina-
ton of every book, paper and voucher in
the company's office, would it not?' ask
ed Mr.. Forbis.
Yes, sir; it would mean more than one
| office. The principal ones would be those
at the New York and Boston end. The
Montana accounts cut little figure in the
matter"
Questioned as to the allegation in the
affidavit to the effect that large sums of
money had been turned over to Leonard
Lewisohn by the Boston and Montana
and no record made of 1t on
the books. MacGinnis said he had done SO
on information and belief; that Arthur
P. Heinze was one of his informants. Mr..
| Heinze, he said, was in court in New
York when the matter was brought out
in the testimony of a case in which the
Montana Ore Purchasing company was
interested. At that time it was stated
that the company had given LeWisohn
$3.50, 900 with which to buy the Sullivan
mine; that the NJ. o. P. Co. at the same
time had put up 500, 900 of the purchase
price for the same property. The Boston
| and Montana money had been placed in
the hands of the Anaconda
through which the purchase by Lewisohn
was to be made, and the decision OF the
court was to the effect that the Ana
| conda should recognize the rights of the
M. O. p. Co..
During the examination of Mr.. Mac
Ginnis several sharp exchanges of words
| occurred between the witness and Mr..
| Forbis, but they We're not of a nature to
| indicate the presence of bitter feeling.
Now, Mr.. HENCE said Mr.. Forbis on
! one OCCASION, don't you know SO and
SOP"
my name is not Heinze,' answered tho
witness. 1T is MacGinnis.'
well it is all the same as HENCE re-
piled Mr.. Forbis.
Mr.. MacGinnis was kept on the stand
most of the day and was cross-questiOn-
ed at considerable length.
Observation-Disclosures.