The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1899-03-26
CON TEMPT OF THE COURT
Continued from Page One.)


place and stoping in another. There
were 100 sacks of ore in a certain nor
ton of the mine on March Q on March
II they were gone, In telling Of seeing
men on the 6OO-fooI level he was
asked:
"Who were they working for?'
"a boss of the Montana Ore Purchas-
ing company was giving orders.
heard him tell the men to hear off to
the left, He claimed to have traced
some of the ore to the station"
By the aid of a man, which was
spread before the justices, the witness
pointed out the spots where he claimed
to have seen men working since the
contempt proceedings, on cross-ex-
animation Governor Smith brought out
that the witness had not measured the
distance with a tame line in order to
know whether the men were working
inside of the PENNSYLVANIA, line. hut
had calculated it by counting the sets
of timber, which he claimed was an
accurate method. On redirect exami-
nation he said he was elected from the
/ told him If he did not get out. the
whole shift would fire him,
F. T Green, another engineer. testi-
fed that he. too, had seen men in the
disputed portion of the mine since
March Q and nointed ont whsre thev
9n
Montana Ore Purchasing conpany's
boss. He. too. had been ordered ont,
One of the bosses told hin, tn % "As
there was enough men to nut me out. I
went" said the witness, causing smiles
to sweep over the attentive spectators
On cross-examination he said he had
nor drawn the man In question He
believed it was accurate, however. He
was positive the men were working and
that If was NOT what is called dead
work, He was not positive whether
both companies had an understanding
that some work could be done for the
purpose of nroying the contentious of
| the litieants
| c, M, Dckerson, another engineer.
| testified practically the same as the
| other two.
F, A. Heinze was recalled and ex-
amined by Governor Smith:
you heard the testimony of these
| narties with reference to work being
dome there since the 9th of March,
yes, sir"
estate to the court what. if ANYTHING,
has been done and what it has been
| done for?',
"wel we have good many injunc-
| tions and suits between the Boston &,
Montana and Montana Ore Purchasing
of accepted custom between us thai
| dead work in the nature of explora ton
on the vein in territory that is abso-
| lutely that Of one party or the other,
should 90 right on. AS to this work,
| T don't know as to whether 1t has been
done or not. 7 am not personally bile
| to state, except that it might possibly
he that II has been done on the propo-
| sition that this was work that was or
dered previous to the time of the in
junction. for the purpose of proving
the contention of one side or the other
in connection with this litigation
| s"This litigation is in the United States
c0urt?"
| yves. sir. and also the claims Of the
narties in this action here"
II will ask you if. when injunctions
were nending in the United States
| court. permission was not given to par
Ties to develop this ground?"
"Welll, the work was continued. This
present work there, the locus of that
vein has got to be determined through
| ont the whole vein before it can be de-
termined what rights attach to the vein
| and what rights attach TO the surface
for this litigation"
HAS there been any ore mined or
extracted from any part of the Penn
sylvania claim for the purpose of US
ing ito,
| VNo sir"
| 1ndge Dawi+t then cross-examined
the witness "Do YOU know that there
has been no ore mined there?"
Ae ives "
1T understand YOU to say you didn't
L,av anvthing about what had oc-
| n,,n,aa thare since the 9th Of March. or
| yo,,r forn,a1 examination?"
.vuaII reneat nv statement before
| that The orders have been given thai
t tac ' sbonld he M mining there, Pre-.
v;ons 70 the Injunction and while the
nroperty was being operated by the
comnanv. there We're somewhere be.
| tween 400 and 1000 cars day hoistet
| o,t ~ that eround."
Ibid Won give orders that your mer
| sborl6 90 on and do work in the Penn
| sv1yania eround?"
mo civ. am simply stating what
NAV be an explanation of the fact tina
th;s. ,,,or1r NAV he going on,
nix Nv W. COW this work was ordered nrio
a.. ~ i,,iynctio, Who ordered it?"
| nuyo,, T ih;r1s that T myself. or m,
.than aftnr consultation with tn,
nh;af anainaers ordered that worl
| 800 ~ was deve1onment work anf
dend work in connection with this lit