Daily inter mountain. [volume] (Butte, Mont.) 1881-1901, 1900-03-21
AMALGhMhTED
AND HyAMS
Effort In Court To Draw Out
Their Relationship.
MANAGER FOR BIGELOW
Parrot Company Answers Mr.. Heinze's
Complaint in Nipper Re-
ownership Case.
MANAGER FOR BIGEL0W

During the hearing of the petition OF
Arthur p. Heinze for the appointment or
a receiver for the Nipper mine In Judge
Clancy's court last evening G.. M. Hyams,
who has been many times reported as
having assumed the general management
of the Amalgamated Mining ompany
vice Marcus Daily, was called upon by the
attorneys for Mr.. Heinze to enlighten the
court on his relations with the Amalga-
mated and other companies operating IN
! this district. Mr.. Hyams said he was
general manager of all the properties con-
trolled by A. S.. Bigelow and his asso-
ciates and that those of the Boston 4
Montana and Butte & Boston We're among
them. He also said he was consulting en-
gineer for the A~malgamated
which position enabled him TO furnish
Marcus Daily with any information he de-
ings of the company's properties.
Asked if he knew the companies In
which the Amalgamated was interested
in Silver Bow county he answered the
Anaconda, Washoe, Parrot n Colorado
companies He ia he did not know
whether the Amalgamated company con-
trolled the majority of the stock of any
of the corporations mentioned; or did he
know the relation existing between the
Amalgamated company on one side and
William Rockefeller and H.. H. Rodgers
on the other. Mr.. Hyams said he had two
desks in Butte, one In the office of the
Boston & Montana company and the 9TH
err in the Hennessy building, n that no
one was under him.. In answer to a ques-
%inr &C ~ u-hara ho obtained hiS inf0rra.
ton regarding the affairs Of the Anal
gamated company, the witness said from
anybody that would give it to him. He
had given orders to no one in connection
with the Amalgamated and had no au-
thority to give them.
In regard to house bill No. / relative to
held in joint tenancy and ten
edge Of it, but further questioning along
this line met with an objection from the
defendants and Judge Clancy sustained
it.
The hearing was commenced about 3
o'clock in the afternoon and continued
until 1915 at night, and not being finish
ed at that hour was adjourned over until
tomorrow morning. During it's progress
the defendant company presented an an
swer to the petition of Mr.. Heinze. In
the document the Parrot alleges hat al
though the petitioner has a lease on the
Nipper the Montana Ore Purchasing COM
pany n F. A. Heinze are the real pain
tiffs. In the petition it was stated by Mr..
Heinze that the Parrot company's claims
to the ore bodies of the Nipper were made
in bad faith and We're the result of col
fusion, but this allegation the Parrot
company, in it's answer, denies. The an
swer admits that the Parrot intended to
bring the suit against the petitioner. It
also admits that a large number of suits
are npn6inp ptwaon tho Pyfto p, Boston
and Boston & Montana companies and
the Montana Ore Purchasing
and F. A. and A. p. Heinze, and that H.
H. Rodgers, William Rockefeller and
Marcus DAILY are interested in the Anal
gamated company. AS to the number
OF shares OF stock held by them, however.
it does not know. or does 1t know
how much stock they hold in
the Anaconda Washoe or Colo
RADIO companies. 1t denies that
they are majority stockholders of
record in the Parrot or that
Rockefeller or Rodgers are members of
the board. Of trustees. It alleges that
Marcus DAILY has and still exercises con-
troll n direction over the affairs of the
company in Montana. The defendant
says, IN it's answer, that there is a
friendly feeling among the companies,
and that the Heinzes and the Montana
Ore Purchasing company are enemies of
them. The Parrot further says that the
vein OF the Nipper dips under a portion
of the Oden lode and that the Washoe
company obtained a temporary injunc-
ton nearly a year ago; that the ore Of
the Nipper is largely copper and that
copper is selling at 16 cents per pound:
that the Heinze brothers and the Mon.
tana Ore Purchasing company have
brought suits against the Boston & Mon
tana and Butte & Boston and obtained
injunctions against them; that they have
also sued the Anaconda companies sew
eral times, and that many of these snits
were instituted for the purpose of
harassing the defendants and compelling
them to buy out the Montana Ore Pur-
chasing company at an inflated price.
The Parrot answer also alleges that
the lease Of A. p. Heinze on the Nipper
is a fraudulent contriyance intended as
a protection for the Heinze brothers and
the Montana Ore Purchasing company
against liability to third parties for ore
alleged to have been extracted and to en-
able them to plead that the ore was sold
as custom ore to the Montana Ore Pur-
chasing company.
Continuing, the answer alleges that at
present there is no way of raising ore
from the Nipper saw through the work
ings controlled by the Heinzes and Mon
tana Ore Purchasing company, and If q
receiver should be appointed he could
not work the property unless he first con
summated an agreement with the
Heinzes; that he would have to work the
ore at a custom smelter, which would
make the cost of mining and treatment
lexpensive; that the plaintiffs. and par.
ticularly A. p. Heinze, have abused thu
process of the court covered by the order
of injunction.
At the night session the petitioner in.
I~troduced some affidavits and court rec.
ords to prove the allegation of conspiracy
on the part Of Daily. Rockefeller ant
others. One of the afidavits was sub,
mitted by Arthur Heinze. Among othel
things Mr.. Heinze alleges that c. S. Bat