Bismarck daily tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, Dakota [N.D.]) 1881-1916, 1900-11-01
MOVES WAS RIGHT.
Unbiased View of the Nome Mining
Claims Dispute by Grand
3 Forks Man. II
j. H. Mathews of Grand Forks Holds
that Judge Noyes Course was
! f.' All Right.
Says the Investigation of the Matter
will Result in Judge Noyes Com
al5a plete Vindication.

n, "m ANSSuAs !" JuoSS NOySS NOW- e.
plete Vindication.
Grand Forks Herald: A great deal
of interest has been taken, and is still
taken in this state in the controversies
which have been going on for some
time in the Cape Nome gold claims,
the title to which is in litigation. The
accusation has been made that Sen
ator Hansbrough, Alex Mckenzie,
Judge Noyes, and others We're engaged
in a conspiracy to defraud the rightful
owners Of these claims of their rights,
and to- appropriate to their own use
the proceeds of some of the richest
gold mines on earth. The story which
has gained wide circulation is that at
the instigation of Mckenzie, Hans
brough succeeded in having passed
through congress bill, which, though
it was modified in form, still contained
a clause which made it possible for q
judge of the Alaska district to decide
the disputed claims without appeal
being taken from his decision. This
being done, Noyes, a friend of McKen-
zie, was appointed judge of the dis
trict, and he and Mckenzie, with
others who were mixed up in the deal,
went to Alaska. Upon their arrival
there suits were Immediately begun to
dispossess the men who were in pos
session, and Mckenzie was appointed
receiver, with authority to work the
claims. It has been claimed that the
sole object of these proceedings was
to place, Mckenzie in possession of the
claims that he might work them dry
while the suits were pending. So far
but little has been heard except the
Mckenzie side Of the story.
Early in the summer James H.
Mathews, of Larimore, visited Nome,
and he was there shortly after the ar
rival Of Mckenzie and Noyes. He
does not share the opinions expressed
by many as to the fraudulent purpose
Of these two men. Yesterday he gave
ont the following statement for pub
lication: s#,
Having read in democratic paper
certain wild and unwarranted asser-
tons in regard to certain matters IN
Alaska and having spent a good part
Of the summer in the Nome district, I
feel it my duty to correct some OF the
misstatements in regard to Judge
sNoyes. .s:S@ .....n.
The conditions in the Nome dis
trict are very unusual. There are
very few claims of any Importance
that are not in litigation. Necessarily
when the cases were brought into
court, applications were made to have
receivers appointed pending the set
tlement of questions of title. Just
before my departure from Nome Judge
Moves requested me to remain at
Nome and take the receivership for
some Of the Anvil claims. Il told him
could not possibly do SO, that had
left home, intending to be absent only
two months; that il / accepted the
appointment would probably have TO
stay in Alaska for a year or two at
least, and that 4 could not do with
out first returning hoe and arrang-
Ing my business matters here.
THE Judge still urged me to stay
and accept the appointment. He
said he was there almost total
stranger and did not want to place
these valuable properties in unworthy
hands, that he was anxious to appoint
responsible PARTIES who would treat
both sides fairly, and who would look
after the property placed in their
hands honestly and In businesslike
naaner He spoke Of his desire To-
deal fairly BY all parties and explained
to ME what my duties as receiver
would pc. He also said that there
were hundreds Of cases to come before
him where receivers would have TO be-
appointed, and he did not want any
mistakea made in the appointments,
and that he did not personally know
six men ct that time In the district,