Show IBEX SMELTER REPORT IN IM prospect of a contest in in court WILL BE HEARD ON OM MONDAY creditors declare tin the schedule shows show the plant Is I 1 losing money disputed account with the horn silver Ls to a charge for ores makes the difference between profit and loss A conte of it over the report of william B E receiver of at the tb ibex mint mini a citina mi m tina company Compan 5 Is 1 promised for mono min tv ir rne report was wa nied filed in the third E D tria court yesterday and iver the pera Uon lon of the company compan fo smelter from june to july several 0 ot the th found fault with the showing made and ana contended that it demonstrated that the smelter Is being operated op orated tit at a loss and that it th ill should be sold old for the benefit of the S JL it lewis lewie rep some of 0 the plaintiffs in the suit cult in which mr humphreys was appointed therefore asked judge for or a hearing on the report the judge replied that he be would devote a portion ol of monday to the hearing hut but that it 1 it was not concluded on that day it would have to be continued until september as he intended to ta adjourn his court on monday bantit the first monday manday in september the porton parton ot or ne receiver celver humphreys report on which the creditors bame their contention that the smelter Is being run at a loss loi Is as ollowa follows by Y schedule icher fule no na 11 which Is a ren cen teal eral balance sheet showing the RBI and value ot of the ores and material a 0 on 01 1 land hand at the time your receiver took possession and cd receipts and expenditures from that time a loss last of MM 20 2 Is shown hown in the operation ot of the plant this loss Is covered by schedule iche dulo no ha M 12 in which tl ft appears that horst horn silver company from which company a urco large amount of 0 ora has been by your receiver has over charra charged your receiver to the amount of 96 addiex this amount to the earnings as it should properly be add od d your receiver has made up to the ednd ot at july after paying all liabilities 76 1 I now nave have hate on art hand toven govess carloads ot of ore from the horn silver buver mining company of the value of 0 about 1600 of which no report Is mado made in my nohe Aule dule ot al assets and earnings these cheso care are were received by me since the 21 2nd and nd 0 of july 2995 and I 1 have refused find and still do to pay for the same until the th overcharge of 0 has haa been adjusted td lusted this overcharge on tho the part of tho the horn silver mining company which they have thus thua tar far failed to cor car street will it if not amicably settled result tn in the refusal of 0 the horn clorn silver com rany rally to furnish ore to your re receiver jid and without which ore your to receiver celver will be unable to ta operate the said bald pm lm ater otter bour receiver Is of ibm th opinion that ti 11 the th horn S silver liver mining company rc ire can fro be obtained in tile he quantities that a continuation of abo bux bun ineas of operating the smelter win will re allt in a profit of from 90 to a 1 court orders ordera matthew lUat thew T gisborn Gla boro administrator A w N B S fugate application 0 at gla brn 1 rn t tc intervene in his personal interi i 0 until a successor euc cessor to him a all nl ni la Is appointed a lippincott I vs VIL bealles woodman c e decree ot of foreclosure by default mathew Mn thew T gisborn vs marlon marion gold mining company hearing hearl nir on an order requiring defendant to show cause causa why it should not be b restrained from mining ore in dispute continued and no time tor for hearing fixed national Kat lonal bank ot of tho the ne publio vs byrum groesbeck et al report ot of re fame confirmed board ot of education vs pacino pacific lum ber company order ot of reference feln stated and referee bowman authorized to proceed with trial of 0 ce AL A J pendleton et ct al vs v B E B E ca caad g lay ny et tit al decree flis cree of 0 foreclosure robert messing va william thomas at t al decree ot of foreclosure with will at stay by of proceedings until november 11 14 1835 2895 by boor sent A hanauer vs ibex mine fine smelt ing inar company judgment by default bom ora silver mining company Vs a ibex mine Sm smelling smelting elting company will wallard of IL green substituted as plaintiff national bonk bank ol of tho the V te publics vs mr W mayrea 1 A babst authorized to intervene Fras sele AL wright et al vs elmer decree quieting W title security bank of v otto otta jensen n tt et t lt judgment by default tor for in evl tho the case of charles backman vs va I 1 E rich and an other members member ot of the peoples peo reO plea PleD company judge judee I 1 ferritt made mae an order Yeat erda morn ing ln providing provi ain that unless the PI filed a new tona bond by 4 yesterday reat erday the tha attachment levied on the isalt works work of 0 the th defendant in D a Is county would lio be dissolved abo about u ll 11 I 1 5 the plaintiff presented pre entea to the clerk of the court a a certified check tor for the tha amount of tho the attachment bond lut but aa tile time fixed by the court had expired tile the clerk declined to accept the I 1 check tho the recounts account of 0 united stat states es corn com greenman tor for the six months montha ended june SO 80 1695 were yesterday approved by 3 judge merritt |