Bisbee daily review., 1907-01-25
COPPER BELLE IS AGAIN
 SUED
Judgment For $24r884,04 Is Now Standing Against Com pany and an Order Made to Sell Claims at Auction,
Special to Review.)

Especial to Review.)
 TOMBSTONE, Ariz., Jan. 24.-The | Copper Belle Mining company, of Ari- | zona, which has been operating at Gleason for a number of years, and which has had more ups and downs than any other mining company in Co chise county, is again a defendant ill an action whereby a sale has been or dered of the mining claims of the company located at Gleason, of which there are ten in number. The notice of the sale has been advertised and posted. and will be held by Sheriff White on the 18th day of February. in front of the court house in Tombstone.
 Martin Costello secured judgment in the district court January 12, for the sum of $24,SS4.06, and costs amounting to $61.45, and an order fore closing the mortgage held by the plaintiff on the property of the de- fendant.
 The case was tried last April before Judge Doan, but the judgmen was he'd up pending a proposed settlement or | the claims against the company. In | February. 1902, the defendant company gave its note to the plaintiff for the l sum of S15,000, which was to run 1 term of three years and to bear inter- est at the rate of ' per cent per an num- At the same time it gave the note, a mortgage was issues against i the property to secure the note, and by the terms of the agreement the com pany was to do the annual assessment work on the property, but during that year it failed to do so. and in order to 1 protect his money the plaintiff was compelled to do the assessment work on eight of the claims, at an expense of $500. The interest was paid on the note in the year 1903, but since that time the company has failed to pay either the note or the interest.
 At the same time that the Costello note was made, the company issued to John Gleason four notes of S13,25O each, to run four, five, six and seven years respectively, with interest at ' per cent The notes in July of the same year were purchased by Costello from Gleason, and before any of them became due. The interest was to be paid annually, the same as the original Costello note. and in the event that It was not paid when due, all of the notes were to fall due, and the holder was given the right to bring suit to fore close shs mortgage. The interest was paid on these notes up to 1903, but no payments made since, so that second cause of action was based against the company on these notes.
 The Copper Belle company a few years since went through the bank ruptcy proceedings, at a loss to not only the company, but also to the many creditors. In September, 1905, the property of the Copper Belle com pany at Gleason was leased under a bond and option to the shannon Cop per company, who at the present time is working it and shipping the ores to the shannon smelter at Clifton. The lease runs until September, 1911, and is for the sum of s14,00O, and royalties on all ores shipped.
 After judgment had been entered in the case, and an order of sale made, the company's attorneys, Hartman & Hereford, filed in the clerks office notice asking for a new trial of the case. based on the following grounds
 First, that the court erred in ad- hitting testimony.
 Second. that the court erred in re jecting testimony.
 Third. that the evidence does not sustain the judgment.
 Fourth, that the judgment is con trarv to the evidence.
 Fifth, that the judgment is contrary to law.
 Sixth, that the court in rendering judgment gave the plaintiff judgment . for certain interests represented by notes covered by the plaintiffs second cause of action. and by the second , mortgage in controversy, while the D court excluded all evidence in refer ence to the second mortgage and the
 indebtedness secured thereby. Seventh, on the ground that no evi !, dence was introduced at the trial as tc I the validity of the second mortgage O ? indebtedness secured thereby. The defendants, on these grounds
 ask that judgment be set aside and tnt order of sale vacated.
 In all probability the company r. through it's attorneys, will sue out D writ of injunction against Sherif ' White to stop the holding of the sai' ' pending a hearing before Judge Doal 2 on the question. These steps vii nrobahIv he taken soon after the re