Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1904-03-31
GUILTY OF CONTEMPT
Judge Beatty Heavily Fines
Copper Magnate Heinze and
His superintendent
FLAGRANT VIOLATION PROVED
VIOLATION PROVED
In View of the contemptuous Treat
ment of the United States Court in
This Case, the Judgment Is consid
cred Lisht-Litisation Was Over the
Michael Davitt Claim.

Butte, Mont. March 31--E'. A. Heinze
! the copper magnate, and two OF his
| mining superintendent, j. II. Trerst
and Alfred Frank, yesterday We're
| found guilty of contempt of the unite(
! States court for willfuly Violating
/ three mining injunctions on the Mich.
! aei Dewitt and other mines issued by
/ Judge Knowles several years ago
eused, fined Heinze $4,000 and Frani
and Trerise $1,000 each He directed
that the fines be paid into court by II
O'Clock this morning or that the de-
PENDANTS be committed to Jail at Helena
pending the further order of the court
Carlos Wartied, the Montana agent
of the Johnstown Mining Company
was discharged, and while the Johns
town company and the Niotana Ore
Purchasing Comapny were also found
guilty no fine was assessed against
them.
The fines against Heinze and his two
CO. defendants We're made only one case
and Judgment in the two other cases
was suspended. In view of the fact
that Heinze had been charged with
taking ore valued at s1,000000 from the
enjoined mining grounds, his engi-
neers admit that about 100000 was
taken. the judgment against the men
is considered a light one.
In passing sentence Judge Beatty said
that In his experience of thirty two
years in mining litigation he had never
seen "a case OF such flagrant violation
of courts order and such conternptu-
Gus treatment of court as in this case.
He said, altho Heinze personally dis
and natural conclusions were that he
was the directing spirit and that the
transfer by him of the ground covered
by the injunction to the JohnstoWn
company was for the purpose of trying
to evade the injunction and defeat the
order OF the court.
Judge Beatty said his action in the
other cases would depend upon the be-
havior of the defendants In future, and
he would give warning that the Sc
Nerest punishment would be inflicted
il defendants We're ever again guilty
of violation of the courts orders.
Heinze smiled when the judgment of
the court was pronounced, and Il shade
of disappointment passed over the
faces of the amalgamated attorneys
who had expected nothing less than
imprisonment for year.
The litigation which resulted in
Heinze being fined is of four years
standing, and is over the Michael
Davitt claim adjoining both the Ra-
rus mine. owned by Mr.. Heinze, and
the Pennsylvania, owned by the Anal
ter part of 1899 the claim was put UNI
der an injunction by Judge Knowles.
of the United States district court,
both parties to the suit being enjoined,
PENDING a decision as to the title,
which decision is still pending
UP to June of last year both parties
observed the injunction. Later the
Heinze concern, owning the Rarus. be-
gan. it is alleged, to mine the claim in
open violation of the courts injunc-
ton. Federal inspectors appointed by
Judge Knowles were refused admit
lance to the Rarus. whence they wished
to get into the Davitt, even when guild
ed by United States Marshal Lloyd.
Then the circuit court judges called in
Beatty to decide whether the orders of
the federal court had been violated.
Three weeks ago Mr.. Heinze, Trerise
and Frank were arrested by Marshal
Lloyd on Judge Knowles order. after
they had refused the marshal and fed
eral inspectors admission to the mine
They were allowed to go on parole un-
til Judge Beatty could get here.