The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1916-06-23
IN SUIT WON
BY VIM. ~GUGGENHEIM
Testimony as to Mine Value
After lie Waived Rights
Is Competent.
SQUABBLE OVER RECORDS

MiNEoLA. l.. l.. Juno 22.-The suit Of
william Guggenhe'm to recover 10000
900 from his brothers. Isaac. Daniel.
Morris. Solomon and Simon. on the
ground that ne was induced fraudulently
to sign away his rights to proht from the
Chuqu.camata copper mine in Chile. at
trac,ed to the Supreme Court here to-
day many mining experts and investors
and n considerable crowd OF persons
who expected that secrets Of finance
and of mining woufi DO revealed.
Evidence and testimony brought
forward by william Guggenheim bore
mainly on two points. AN attempt TO
prove tina the defendant brothers were
we'll aware of the potential value Of the
Chuqulcamata mine when they per-
suaded william to r%elinquish all rights
in the property and an attempt to APP
proximate the actual value OF the mine
In 1912 through stock sale figures for
1914 and 1915.
At the beginning OF the morning ses-
sion William u. Guthrie OF ounse for
the defendants contendei that no evil
decce as to the value OF the mine was
admissible IL 1t had to do with matters
subsequent TO the signing of the waiver
Ov william GugSenheIm on January 4,
l?i2. and that testimony nr statements
ty mining engineers tending to show
mat the defendants knew OF the value
~ the mine when they obta ned a waiver
| ~ rights from their brother were not
competent evidence II such statements
were made after william Guggenhcim
\ r~eluuuiSher, his rights
Attorneys IL a Clash.
Justice C~allaghan denied the motion
and ordered the hearing to proceed. The
session was marked by a show Of
| lcrimony between stephen C. Baldwin
and Samuel Untermyer. Mr.. Baldwin.
denied certain letters from the files OF
the Guggenhcim firm. minated hat MIR.
untermyer WAS violating a gentleman y
agreement"
In the morning Mr.. Baldwin. touch
'ng upon the two points OF proof referred
TO-. read copiously from the records of
the Ross-Burrage trial In Boston in July,
1914, In which occurred "A letter written
ny Pope Neatman. n mining engineer
tnd chief ~ the Guggeneim engineering
STAFF, to Burrage on February s. 1913.
ana setting the price for mining copper
at > cents n pound.
ne rfd'll'lE ltbl0 inc records OF tnt
previous hearing was Interrupted 10y
argument. MIR. Baldwin argued that the
sale Of the stock "f the Chile Copper
Company Of Delaware In 1914 and 1871;
was some evidence as To the value al
the stock of the chile Exploration Com
panN. The first mpa to work IN.
thuVuICamata mine. The extent Of IN.
damage lone to the plaintiff could b,
computed. he contended, by using thu
value of the stock as A basis. Mr.. iuth,
RE replied that several million dollars
had been put into the mine subsequen'
10 William iuggenheim's Withdrawal
ard hat the plaintiff had waited three
years before bringing suit 10 see how thu
project would turn out.
AT the afternoon session Pope ieat
mar OF Philadelphia testified as To- ex
an'indtIons he had made OF the chuqui
camita prospect. He said that he hat
written a letter as far back as June II
1911, stating that he favored the mine
The defence has been that the real valu'
OF the mine WAS not known at the TIM
William G~uggcuheim signed a waiver o
rights and that So far as the othe
brothers knew II was In the category q
other prospects which the firm had take,
over, prospects that might turn out We
or might be valueless.