Daily inter mountain., 1900-08-27
FIFTY DOLLARS
FOR Mr., H|NDS
BOSTON & MONTANA FIXES
VALUE ON HIS SERVICES
AS RECEIVER.
ALSO SCALES CLAIMS OF
ATTORNEYS AND ASSISTANT.
Mr. Kinds onlyAskeu for Four Hun
dred Thousand-Company's An
swer Is Crushing.

The Boston & Montana Mining COM
pahy does not propose to pay Thomas r.
1ilnds 100000 for alleged services as re-
celVer II 1T can help it, and with this
oh.ect IN view has filed in the district
court It's answer and objection to the re-
port made by Mr.. Kinds to the court
, a short time ago.
I In the report Mr.. Kinds valued his
services at one per cent of the value of
'he company's property, which he placed
a. $4u,ooU,ooO. He also asked that James
+. Stanford, his assistant, whom he
placed in charge of the companys smelt-
| ers at Great Falls, he allowed $14 OOO and
the attorneys an aggregate of more than
| $4,000.
! In its answer the company SAYS the re-
celVer performed services worth not
more than $50 and the assistant receiver
work for which he should be paid not
more than $40. The allowance for at
, tcrneys, it says, should not exceed $780,
and that if the court allows the receiver
anything the allowance should be met
by the plaintiffs to the action, James
Forester and John McGinnis The COM
pany denies the allegation that it was
necessary to appoint a receiver or an as
s1stant receiver or that Kinds had any
authority to appoint an assistant. 1t
AYERS that $1,000 per year would have
been sufficient compensation Tor the as
slstant, and as he acted as such assist
ant only five days $40 is amply sufficient.
II he expended s17SG4 he did so without
authority, says the company; and it was
not necessary for him to employ an at
torney at an expense of $500.
The company admits in it's document
that Kinds took possession of the prop
erty on April s, 1S99 and held it until
April IL of that year, at which time by
order of the supreme court he surrend-
cred it.
AS to the allegation that the receiver
was opposed when he took hold of the
property and that his life was threatened
the company says it is not true; that
he tried to get it and no violence was
offered him by anyone.
The company denies that by reason Of
alleged threats attributed to it the re-
ceiver's life was endangered, or that the
receivers posi- ion was one Of grave re-
sponsihility; denies that the receiver in.
CURED any expense in behalf Of the com
pany for the benefit of the property. 1t
| questions the employment Of Austin
Brown as consulting engineer at an ex-
pense of $1,000, and adds that if Mr..
Brown performed any service it was not
worth more than s25. 1t alleges that
Brown was never in the smelter at Great
Falls, where he is alleged TO have per-
formed service, and that mis- charge for
alleged work is fraudulent and nlaue for
the purpose of defraudi;a1. It.
The company denies tina, the receiver
had to employ w. Y. Pemberton and
John B. McClernan as ia. advisers. or
that they performed work worth $4,000
and $1,000 respectively; that if they were
employed their services We're not worth
more than $100 each.
The correctness of the bill of $500 put
in by Mr.. Kinds for j. J. Harrington for
alleged work on the books is disputed,
with the further statement that if Har-
rinaton did any work it was not worth
more than S25. The company denies that
, the receivers compensation should be
one per cent of the value Of the prop
erty, supplementing the alleea ton with
i the statement that he was in eharre Of
the property only five days, during which
ime he performed services of no value
to the property Or anyone else, and that
$40 a day is a large and sufficient. COM
pensaton for his work.