OCR Text |
Show THE OLD TELEGRAPH. The Caae Taken Dp Again In iht District Conrt on Monday. The inlereat in this euit has by nu means been lessened by the two wek' rest given it, as was manifested by the attendance at the court room yesterday. The attorneys for both defendants and plaintiffs were a I present, Judge Burke, who is aesoci ated with Messrs. Bennett k. Hrk ness, having returned from the eat. Tbe proceedings commenced by Judge Bennett moving to take up the amendment to the answers offered by him early in January ; but as the plaintiffs' counsel were not prepared to take it up now, on the suggestion of Judge Critchfiela, Wednesday waa I assigned for hearing it. Mr. Holden'd crois-Ljianiafttion b Judge Critchfield was then proceeded with, during which the witness explained ex-plained what bodies of ore were in the mine at the time the negotiations were pending (or the purchase by the Kalamazoo parties ; aleo what forces had been at work in tha mi no since the commencement of this suit on December Sih. The number of men varied ; never had worked more than seventy, and did not increase the force since this suit was begun. Mr. Holden also denied de-nied that a force of men had worked on Sunday ; there bad been no work done on the "seventh day of the week" with his knowledge; he had not given orders for work to be done on Sunday; if such was done, it was without his knowledge. Since the adjournment of the case, and during the hearing, work was being ! prosecuted in tbe mine, but witness i did not give it close attention. Conn ' sel here showed witueia a resoluUuu authorizing the transfor of 10,000 of bonds of the company, purporting to have been written at the meeting of stockholders held February 11, 1876, and aaked if it was in his handwriting, aad if it was written for the purpose named in it, to which affirmative an- 1 swer was made; but wilneas denied that tbe record of that meeting as it appeared in the record book was a true one, and that the original book was not before him. The entry made by Trask of the meeting of February 1st was not a true one, as witness waa not at a stockholders' meeting then held. Huw did you know it wng not a true record if you were not at the meeting? Because it charged him falsely and represented bim incorrectly. incor-rectly. Mr. Holden had no comniu nication with Trask as to having proxies to meet the requirements of the meeting; the meeting of April 14 was not called because of a failure to get prexies. Here he was shown the resolution, and aaked if he didn't write it at the February meeting. He replied he never offered the resolution at the February 1st stockholders' meeting. Counsel here handed witness wit-ness a number of letters and a telegram tele-gram and asked him if he wrote them. He answered affirmatively as to the writing of the letters and presumed he sent the dippatcb. These were not offered as part of the examination, hut would be introduced hereafter, Mr. Holden was again shown the resolution reso-lution and testified that he wrote it all except the top, which read: ".Stockholders' meeting, Feb. 1st, 1876." Mr. Bennett here oflorcd an affidavit affi-davit by Amasa Stover, whioh was objected to by Mr. Johnson, because it was not verified according to the statutes of the territory; it should have been verified before the judge of some court of record. Mr. Bennett withdrew with-drew it for the preBent. Mr. Bennett gave Mr. Holden a copy of a report made by him (H. ) to Mr. Trask, April 26, and asked him if it wai a correct copy? He had not the original in hia possession, bb he had given it to Trask. The present copy was a copy of a copy and waa made by his clerk oa Monday. Counsel Coun-sel for plaintiffs wanted the other copy and it was ordered to be produced. Mr. McQueen was next put upon the stand by the defense and questioned ques-tioned as to the bodies of ore in sight, opened up, sloped out and being worked at the time Defoliations were ; pending for the purchase of tho mine. Thia witness peinted out on the map tbe progress made from the time tbe first ere body was struck until h took charge of it July 11, 1876, and gave the dimensions of the different cham bers and descriptions of the ores in the inclines and drifts as they were j then run. To the question of counsel ho stated he had been a miner aince 1 1862; waa familiar with mines in I Bingham, and knew the value of ! mines. When asked what, in his judgment, was a fair value for the Old Telegraph mines when he went into them, Counsel for plaintiffs interposed objection, ob-jection, stating that the mine should have a market value, established by publio verdict, belore introducing testimony tes-timony regarding its value. It couid noi. have a market value; never had any as contemplated in the law. Mr. Bennett remarked that the plaintiffs bad set up that the mine was worth $1,000,000, and he proposed pro-posed to shew that it waa not at that time worth near that amount. The plaintifla had been blinded by the gilding and glamor of its subsequent workings and developments, and the question now was, did the defendants do wrong in buying the property when thure was :so value on it. It was offered to show the value of the properly at the time of the purchase by the Kalamazoo parties. After further remarks by Judge Burke and Judge Crichfield, the objection ob-jection was overruled and the question ques-tion was aaked, to which wilueas replied that he never had heard the market value. Reoess was then taken till 2 o'clock, In tho arternooo, Mr. McQueen's testimony was continued. The first question put whs: What, in your judgment, was the value of the Old Telegraph mines on tho 25th day of April, 1876? WitneFs said $60,000. Couoeel then led witness to explaining explain-ing that he waB familiar with the working on the 310-loot level in April; lhal there was prior to that no value io the Old Telegraph property, as the vi'n was uudersti-od to belong .o the Montreal. 'Itie month olj April was a bad month for hauling and only a few teems were at work until a contract was let for hauling 8UO or 400 tons at 50 cents a ton, and fveu that was stepped on till Mr. Uoldeo went out and raiatd the contract con-tract price another ten cents, making it 60 cents a ton. No great amount of ore was got out up to the 22d or 23d of April; a new road waa then made frmi the gulch to the new ore house. Witness was fsmilur with the Esay value of the ores previous to April, eome of which showed 65 per cent, lead, BG.ie 70 per cent, lead and 9 ounces ailver, some IS ounces silver and 40 per wnt. lead, and acme 30 ounces diiver and 10 per cent lead. Mr. Johnson then cross-eimined Mr. McQueen. Ho had no theoretical knowledge of mining; bit was all practical; he could tell ore from country rock; what he knew of ibe mines lu dispute in February, 1876. ne knew from actual obgprvmion; he ; dad acled e pi.periritpndent for Mr. Holileu iio c April, '76, till February, '77. Tr.nujlu the cmbinM orcper-tusonin orcper-tusonin 2tiih of April, '76. were i w..rtli fOuu.'O, and ihet they were wurtti now hail a million. He hasfcd ua npinion on the devi'lnutnr nie. Ine mines Ld he o increased i:j value by the output. li a mine is capable of an output of a unliion dollars in two year, GO per cent, of which was net profit to the ownsr, how was it only worth $60,-000 $60,-000 ? His estimate waa baaed on the ore then insight, not on tbe output since. He was aware that the mineB (yielded largely when he made bis ieutimsle. What, in your judgment, : wuuld a mine be worth lhal yielded $20,000 a month? That would depend de-pend on the coat of handling, shipping, ship-ping, etc. What would it be worth wuh a reasonable probability that it would continue so to yield for a twelvemonth? riuch a mine would be worth $200,000. What would you have estimated the value of tho mine at on the 1st of May, had you kuown the output? If the net product of the mine was $30,000 or $40,000 a mouth, it would be worth 9o per cent, of the product. He baded nia estimate then on what had ! hevn taken out aud what ore was in eight. The output exceeded hia es-! es-! iinjAle in My. He was satisfied lo-' lo-' day that bin estimate made on the 25ih of April was too low. He tormed the opinion two or three weeks ago, and knew of tbe output ot the mines when he formed his estimate. estim-ate. Don't you think that a man on going go-ing into a mine for an hour or so would not have known much when he came out? That depended. Some men would know very little, others would know more, while others again never would know much. If you were sent as an expert to examine the mine, wouldn't it be your duly to ascertain what the mine waa yielding? Yw. The current product ol a mine was a guide to the value to be put on it. j Mr. Marshall then took the witness and by reference to the maps showed where the bodies of ore were on the 25th of April. Mr. Bennett followed the examination exami-nation of this witneaa with the presentation pre-sentation of the affidavits of George Cullins, A. G, Bemia, Alfred Douchet and Ieadore Morria, all of which referred re-ferred to their estimated value of the mines in January, 1876, and dw acribed the workings of them. The valuations of tneae men were variously placed at $25,000, $15,000 and $75,000. At the close of the roading ol the last one, Mr. Bennett aaid he had a number mors, whan the oourt adjouruect till 0.80 a.m. Tuesday morning. |