Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1901-06-20
COPPER KINGS PLAN
10 CRUSH HEINZE

New York Herald, June 18TH
Amalgamated Copper interests, repr.
scented by the Boston & Montana Uopns
Co., have instituted proceedin9
against the Heinzes, which, IL success,
Jul, will terminate the long legal wa,
fare which the latter have been wapin'
against the Standard Oil copper rrope,
ties. The new attack is being mad
against the Delaware Surety Co.,
corporation which has offered to guar
antee the bonds demanded by the Mon
tana courts before the Hejnzes cal
operate their mines.
A significant feature in recent hear
ings of the case was the fact that job,
u. Little. Jr., assistant chief counse
of the Metropolitan Street RAILWAY a
this city, appeared as counsel ftx IN,
Heinzes. This has given rise
rumor that w. e. Whitney may b
supporting the Heinze case.
In the litigation, In the Suprem,
Court OF Montana, over the titlejo
certain copper minea, the court re.
strained the Standard Oil interest
from operating the mines, but permit.
ted the Heinzes to operate them, mend.
ing decision, upon giving bonds, II
was necessary to submit bond fully
| guaranteed TO the extent of $3.50, 600.
AS the Clarks had seemingly deserted
tho Heinzes, resort was had to the
Delaware Surety Co. a concern Recently
organized under Delaware laws, with a
| capital of 81, 000,0 200.
The plaintiff, the Boston & Montana
Copper Co., objected to this bond as
| insufficient and obtained permission OF
| the court to examine the bond before
1t was taken. The court appointed as
a commissioner George H. Corey Of
| No. 56 Wall street to take testimony in
the case. Some interesting testimony
| was introduced at the hearings, which
we're concluded yesterday.
| The alteration of the Boston comnany
| was that the bond offered was insult
ficient and that the standing OF the
Delaware Surety 90. was unknown in
| the commercial world. The plaintiff
was represented by Hoadley, Luuter-
bach q johnson and Franklin appeared
| for the surety company. The testi-
mony taken showed that within two
| days after the making of the order
naming Mr.. Corey commissioner, every
one Of the officers Of the company left
| the jurisdiction of the court and hey ond
| the reach of subpenas granted by
Justio Mclean of the Supreme Court.
Mr.. Biep was called as one of the
first witnesses by Mr.. Lauterbach, and
protested entire. Ignorance of the affairs
| of the surety company, of which he
| was counsel. He disclaimed ali knowl.
edge OF the property and funds OF the
company and referred all inquirers to
the officers Of the company, who, &C.
| cording-to the testimony taken, were
beyond the reach of subptenas. Testi.
mony was introduced showing thai
these officers had been questioned prior
to the appointment OF commission by
commercial agents desiring knowledge
| Of Its affairs, aud had said that Mr..
Bien was 10 possession Of all the infor
nation. Mr.! Bien left for Europe or
June 4th, the day after the hearings
began, and since that time he has beer
represented by John 4. Little. Jr.
Testimony was then introduced BY
Mr.. Lauterbach and Mr.. Limberger
who acted as assistant counsel for thu
| firm, to show that the officers of this
Delaware Surety Co. were in realit,
figureheads, and that many Of then
were clerks in the employ OF ths
Heinzes. 1t was shown in the testimon,
\ that at the sole office of tue COMPANY
in Delaware not even desk ia Kept
A telegram sent by the comm issione
was returned undelivered. for the rea
son, it was explained, the company /
office was located at No. 317 broadway
New York, the address of Mr.. Bien'i
office.
The report Of the commissioner is re
turnable next week. Attorneys for tn,
plaintiff will go to Montana to urg,
the court to revoke it's permission fo
the operation Of the Heinze coppe
properties. Ii is said the secretary O
the State Of Delaware will be asked t.
revoke and annul the charter of th,
Delaware Surety 90.