The Idaho world. [volume] (Idaho City, Idaho Territory) 1864-1918, 1865-10-07
Questions en- Mining Law.

An interesting mining case is pending in
the Supreme Court of Nevada, A ledge was
discovered il 1859 By Smith & Gottschall,
who with eleven others located claim up
on it. The notice contained thirteen names,
but claimed fourteen shares of three hundred
feet each-one extra share being claimed as
q discovery right. Subsequently the com
pany incorporated aud issued stock, one
share being issued for each foot Of ground,
each member of the company receiving au
equal amount of stock The stock proving
valuable Smith & Gottschall subsequently
commenced suit claiming stock for the dis
corery claim. The District Cont found that
the Plaintiffs were the DISCOVERIES and had
not waived their rights that the discovery
claim had been improperly divided among the
stockholders, and decreed that the company
should issue to them additional certificates
of stock equivalent to the discovery claim of
three hundred feet. On appeal to the Su-
preme Court, it was admitted by the court
that if Smith 4 Gottschall discovered the
ledge and were entitled to the discovery claim,
they could oily lose that right by some
clear and positive evidence of having divest-
ed themselves thereof. The court however
was puzzled to decide how to reach the cor
rect remedy. The company had already is
sued all the certificates allowed by its con-
stitution. TheJudge said:
ave are satisfied that when corporation
has issued certificates of stock (which are
valid and not void) to the full extent of
all the shares, which, by law and the const-
tuition of the company, itmay issue, no Court
can order the issuance of other shares, be-
cause in that respect the forms of the cor
poration have been exhausted.
The 6rst question thento be determined is,
were the certificates issued to the locaters
supposed proportion of the discoveries share
absolutely void, or were they valid certificates
issued to the wrong party.
II void, then the ruling and decree are right,
and the Judgment must be affirmed. II, how
ever, these certificates are not void, then the
plaintiffs are entitled to different remedy.
AhCJ AuS1 bO CullCICQ " COu-
pensation from the company, or else toa rem
edy against the other locaters, who receiy-
ed more stock than they were entitled to.
Again, what is the extent of the remedy to
which they are entitled? If they receive
stock from other locaters, must they not re-
fund any assessments paid by those to whom
the stock was issued? If they receive pecu-
MARY compensation from the corporation, are
they to receive the full value of the stock or
its value less the amount of assessments paid
or payable on the same? These are mo st
important questions, not merely In this ca SCI
but to all mining corporations. Doubts must
frequently arise as to how many shares par
ticular individuals are entitled in mining
corporations; mistakes must frequently be
made in issuing shares. It is highly impor-
tant to have some fixed rule as to how these
mistakes are to be corrected. Who are to
be made parties to bill for that purpose
What is to be the nature of the relief afford
ed? Before determining this case we wish
to hear arguments on the points suggested.
We are not only willing to hear argument
from the counsel in this case, but also from
the counsel of other mining companies who
are interested in the question.
The case was set for October.