The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1899-07-27
VISION ON THE STAND
In the Trial Of the Minnie Healey
Mining Case.
BEFORE JUDGE LINDSAY
Finlen Said That Devlin Was offered
$4,000 by the Heinzss-The
Defense Begin Their
Case.

| on again to-day. The action is brought
by Miles Finlen against F. Aug, Helnze
and the Montana Ore Purchasing COM
pany to enjoin them from working the
Minnie Healey, both parties claiming
the property, or rather the right to the
lease and the bond from the owners
| Some of the testimony yesterday was
quite interesting. When the hearing
was resumed yesterday morning, w.
| w. Wishon was recalled by Judge Nc
Hatton for further cross-examination
| He was asked how often after Novem-
Der, 1898, while the mine was being op-
Grated by Mr. Heinze, he, on behalf of
Miles Finlen, went to the mine. The
witness replied:
''Infrequently.''
| Mr. Wishon also testified that re sent
| a number of men to the Minnie Healey
| to take charge of the mine on the Gath
| day of last February, but they were
/ not successful in securing possession,
though we were supposed to be in
! possession he said He was asked:
why did you send the men DOWN."
| and answered:
| II thought I might need Them.
| Wasn't 1t because you thought you
| would require them so as to get pos
session.
| Yes"
Where was Mr.. Finlen at the time
e. L. Mahoney took charge of the
mine in November 1882"
| I'm the East. When Mr.. Heinze took
| charge of the property he went to the
600 level and commenced taking out
| low grade ore that we had developed
| He had a smelter and could work the
1 - {arr 4, 80
| per had gone up good deal. Up t.
| February, 1899, / paid all the men en-
gagged at the mine, excepting Mahonev.
| Mr.. F'inlen also paid nearly all other
| expenses.
| Wasn't it understood that Mr..
! Heinze would repay all money expend-
| ed by Mr.. Finlen for wages and sup
| lies?'
| Yes, before February a. and a.
about that time. other arrangements
| were made"
Did Heinze ever offer to repay this
| money. or any part of it?"
Yes, sir; he offered to pay $4,000 on
account at one time. and l declined to
accept it. That tender was before Feb.
| gath"
| Miles Finlen, the plaintiff in the case,
| testified that before the commencement
| OF the suit he made a demand on John
Devlin and Mrs. Riley for deed to
/
| Eealey.
| when / made the demand on Devlin
he said that he had transferred one
| eighth to Heinze. A few days after
wards I met him in the law office of
! William Scallon He was there seeking
| advice about this matter and said that
| he had been offered $15,0C0 more by
Heinze than he had agreed to sell to
me for, and he wanted to know how
/ to get around it. Mr.. Scallon refused
/ to advise him."
| George Stevenson, assistant cashier
of the First National bank, testified
| concerning the deposit by Mr.. Finlen in
the bank of the sum OF $4,000 to be
| paid to the owners of the three fourths
| interest in the mine when. a deed was
| delivered. He said the deed had NOT
been offered and the bank still held the
money.
That closed the case for the plaintiff
and James MacFarlane was the first
witness for the defense. He stated that
he was not now in the employ of F,
Augustus Heinze or the Montana Ore
Purchasing company and that his only
employment by either was as a witness
| in mining litigation. He said that he
first became connected with the Minnie
| Healey lode as superintendent of the
| mine in December, 1898. He took pos
session for Mr.. Heinze from the repre-
sentatives of Mr.. Finlen and COM
| menced active operations. For long
| time prior the mine had been shut down
| and the only persons engaged at the
| property were watchmen. He installed
! e. L. Mahoney as foreman and in
| structed him what he wanted done. The
mine was operated under MacFarlane's
| direction until June LIST of this year
| when I took charge there were no
| ore bodies exposed in the NINE" said
| Mr. MacFarlane. "At some places there
was a small showing, but nothing of
| value had been developed and was not
until after | commenced operations for
| Heinze. We hoisted from 70 ITO 100 cars
! of ore a day. The work we did made
the mine and gave it all the value it
| now has. Prior to the time we took
| charge, / don't believe anyone would
| have given anything for the property
! The work which had been carried on by
Finlen indicated that the property was
OF no value. | know nothing about the
attempt to take away our possession on
| Feb. "a, but I do know that operations
| went on afterwards just as before
The witness was asked on cross-ex-
animation as to who paid the men en-
| ployed. He stated that he did not, but
| had instructed Mahoney to turn over
the payroll to Mr.. wishon at the end
of the month, and that he did not know
| who paid the men.
John Devlin testified that he was one
of the original locators of the Minnie
| Heaiey cpaim and That he resides on the
! property Continuing his testimony he
| said
Mr. Finlen made a demand on me
for deed some time in May. I deny
| that l went TO consult Mr. Scallon. 1
| went to see Scallon at Finlens request.
Before Mr. Finlen demanded the deed
! l was notified that Heinze had acquired
| Finlen's interest in the property. I'm
der the terms of the lease and bond
| given to Miles Finlen we were privi-
| legged to sell any interest we owned at
| any time. We did so and so his demand
Tor a conveyance could not be complied
| with. / told Mr. Scallon the circum-
stances and showed him some papers in
connection with the matter. Before l
made transfer of any part of the
claim, Mr.. Finlen had stated that the
property would in few days be turned
| over to the Heinze people. He also
said he did not intend to do any more
| work there and Heinze would run the