Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1905-08-07
LATTER Get TEN DAYS MORE.
The Surprising Answer of the Biug.
ham Mining aud Smelling Company
10 Denying Ownership.
AN AST0NlSHER ALL AROUND.
COmpauy's Attorney Say 1t Should
Never Have Been Made De-
tendaat at ALL

After delays secured from time to
time thc second step was taken today in
the legal battle between the allied
farmers and smelter operators OF Salt
Lake valley, to secure the abatement Of
the smoke trouble arising from the
Bingham Junction and Murray smell
tiers. or else the closing Of the smelters
IN that locality
This afternoon the Utah CONSOLIDATE
ed Mining company one Of the defend
ants, operating the Highland boy smel.
ter, made lis answer to the suit OF the
farmers, praying for am injunction per-
manently stopping the smelter from OPP
Grating Until the smoke problem is
solved. This morning the Bingham CON
solidated Mining & Smelling company
filed like answer The American
Smelling & Refining company, and the
United States Smelling company APP
peared IN the Federal court and Sc
cured an extension OF the time In which
to file answer until Aug 10.
The answer OF the Utah Consolidated
Mining company is filed by Sutherland
Van Colt and Allison, while that Of
Bingham Consolidated Mining CONF
pany is fled by the law firm Of Rogers
& Street
SUIT OF THE FARMERS,
The suit Of the farmers, to which
these answers are now made, was filed
by the firms of King Burton & King
and JOS. l.. Rawlins early In April Of
this year, and June 9Th was the day
first set for the answers OF the smelt-
ers to be filed. However on account
Of the importance Of the case and the
difficulty OF preparing legal papers de-
lays were granted from time to time
until today, and then another short de-
lay was granted two Of the companies.
"a -GAslt,sA ANswER
The answer Of the Bingham Consold-
ated Mining aud Smelling company is
merely a general denial Ii does not
go into the question IN detail, but de-
MES that Il owns the Bingham Con-
solidated smelter al Bingham Junction,
and denies that It is In any way re-
sponsible for the shelter further de-
nying that II owns any smelter at
Bingham Junction. When asked about
this today, Judge Street who represents
the company said that he considered
that the company should never have
been named as a defendant and owner
OF the Bingham Consolidated smelter.
1t Is now stated that the Bingham
Copper and Gold Mining company
owns and operates the smelter, but
the accuracy Of this statement has not
been confirmed.
MORE IN DETAIL,
The answed OF the Utah Consolidat-
ed Mining company Is much more IN
detail. and goes into the question In
detail. II denies any knowledge OF the
extent Of the damages as set forth Ia
the bill Of complaint, and leaves II 10
the petitioners TO prove how extern
sive these are.
II admits that 'on a few farms the
growing vegetation is slightly damaged
at certain times Of the year" but de-
MES that farms are extensively dam
aged or rendered Improbable
II denies that the smelter is or has
eeen q nuisance, and that all the farms
mentioned I'm the complaint arc located
within a radius Of four miles from the
smeter. II denies that II handles lead
ore. or that more than a small guam
tlty OF sulphur di-oxide is deposited ON
the farms, admitting that II reduces ore
ootaining copper and sulphur
SOLVING PROBLEM.
On the question OF solving the smoke
problem, ID says that Improvements
may be made I'm the near future, so
that even such damage may be obvi-
ated, and II any such improvements are
made this company viii adopt them so
as TO avoid any injury,
Regarding remedies at law n denies
that there Is not now adequate RENE
dies az hand for the complaints alleged.
Further answering the company sets
forth that Il erected the plant. and
equipped II With the most modern ma
chlnery at a. cost Of $4,000 and is
smelling ores from its Bingham mines,
valued AT sl0O0000o run over tram
way costing $4,000, that Il hires
$50 men, receiving wages amounting to
$4,000 per month; that 700 tons Of ore
are shipped a day from the mines 10
the Smelter. and that these ores can
not he shipped 10 any other place In
Utah 10 he suitably handled. and no
other place IN Utah can he built 10 ac-
commodate the ores without complaints
similar to the present ones being filed
II closes by pointing out the great
financial loss that would follow should
II close Tor a single day even, and
prays that the compliments be given
no relief.