Show MONTANA COIl Rl Ih of ut to 10 toI Hold I ml ii Stuck Slue S I us k In ii Oilier I her Cuni lu Butte Hutte Smut Mont Feb l elJ 1 Lawyers anti mining men Inen say the tho effect of ot HIP tite deci decision sion of lit the court hi In the lIme cage of John against ll t the tho Boston Montana Mining company Is III to recognize tho ho right of at the tho Amalgamated cotillion company to lo do titi ll business in Montana and tn to hold Bloc stitch In other oilier corporations when such holding In is not for or tho pur IlOilO of or creating a ti monopoly Another effect will 1111 be ie It Is claimed to 10 release the money amounting to W I 0 now non no lido up UI In Jim time tho hands of or tIme the Butte and amid nuil the tho Parrott com coin company tinny pany amid m ichi In Is duo clue IlO the timo go iii ns as dividends Tho Time suit milt the payment 1 of oC these the o di dividends Timi substance of the tho decision III Is that Is III a it 1 private Individual ant anthas has no III rl ht hl to maintain an action the Amalgamated doing busl III lu Montana on the Ihl thi grounds that It Is III a II monopoly ouch as an being mania main maintainable only by Iy the unto state that under tho evidence In record the tue Amalgam atell Copper company Is Iii I neither n a trust or monopoly h that under hailer the Ihl lawn of ot Montana one omme corporation may many hold hail as na completely as Its nn Ill Individual stock In III other lither corporations and that the thC Is rot not against public policy |