The Anaconda standard., 1899-04-16
The Stockholders Didn't Meet.

Judge Clancy granted a temporary
restraining order on the 4th of June,
1898, and the stockholders meeting,
which was to have been held on the 9Th,
was prevented, and from that date un-
til last Thursday the changes have been
rapid. On hearing of the motion for
an injunction and receiver, which was
had on June %, the attorneys for the
Boston & Montana company made a
statement to the court that if it should
finally be determined that the company
acted wrongfully and unlawfully in
deciding the property to the New York
corporation, it would be reconveyed to
the Montana company. Upon that state
ment Judge Clancy, so he afterward
said, declined to appoint receiver at
that time, but issued an injunction to
prevent further interference with the
property by the defendants. An ap-
peal was taken to the supreme court
from the injunction order, and the su-
preme court sustained Clancy. The
Eastern attorneys of the company were
not satisfied with the decision of the
supreme court, and a motion for re-
hearing was made and was by the
court denied. In the meantime. on De-
cember 15, the attorneys for Forester
and MacGinniss again asked Judge
Clancy to appoint a receiver for the
company on the plea that the Boston &
and had violated its promise to recon-
vey the property. Without notice to the
defendants attorneys, and without a
hearing or examination of any sort,
Judge Clancy signed the order appoint
ing a receiver for the property of the
company, and named Thomas R. Kinds,
eX-connty treasurer, for the office. The
next day the supreme court was again
appealed to and a certiorari was is
sued to review the order anDointing the
receiver, and on February q last the
certiorari was dismissed by the su-
preme court, but a stay in the receiv-
ership was granted until March 6. Be
fore that time, however, on February
%. the New York company had decided
back to the Montana company all the
real and personal property which had
passed into its possession, and a mo-
ton was made to discharge the receiver
on the ground that the acts complained
of had been remedied and there was no
longer any necessity for the appoint
ment of a receiver. A motion for leave
to file supplemental answer was also
filed, and Judge Clancy was asked to
hear them before the expiration of the
stay granted by the supreme court. but
he refused to do so. The plaintiffs at
tOrneyS asked to have the hearing set
for March Z or s, and the court put it
off until the 9th, a day or two later
than even the plaintiffs attorneys had
asked for. II was evident that the
court was not particularly inclined in
favor of the defendants, and when the
supreme court granted another stay by
holding the remttitur until March IA,
Judge Clancy put the hearing of the
motion off until March IS. On the 18th
the certiorari remttitur was filed in the
district court and Receiver Kinds made
a demand for possession of the proper
ties and was refused. Another effort
was made to induce Clancy to hear the
motion to discharge, but he declined.
and the supreme court issued writ of
prohibition to prevent Hinds from at
tempting to take possession of the de-
PENDANTS properties, and the next day,
on March is, Judge Clancy ordered all
motions continued for hearing indef-
nitely and without day. but upon the
suggestion of the plaintiffs attorney the
order was changed and the hearing
was set down for March 80. The su-
preme court then issued a writ of man