Pioche daily record. [volume] (Pioche, Nev.) 1872-1876, 1873-04-30

tees OF plaintiffs, as the mimi, ground was
open when the Hermes location was
made and they could not be restricted
from making that location. The Panaca
title will have TO stand or fall on its own
merits. 1t was absolutely bad, and left
the ground open to II location by Mr..
Perley and Lightner or others, or 1t was
good and remains SO. That the Panaca
ledge was IA separate aud distinct ledge,
and no connection between it ana the
ore IN controversy has been proven, but
II 1t were not SO, and if the title of the
Panaca were good in the beginning, still
1t was forfeited by suspending WORK four
or hve years. The amendments Of 1865
to the Meadow Valley mining laws are
void. Authority read. They are void
for various reasons: Because they are
in contravention of the general law OF the
land, as laid down by the Conrts, requir-
ing work to be prosecuted with reasona-
BILE diligence. Is it reasonable that
claims should be held by mere location
and record for all time to come, without
work? Miners cannot pass unreasonable
laws, and laws in contravention OF the uni
form rulings of the Courts as to what i, rea-
sonGble within the policy of the law.
continued at great length illustrating the
worthlessness of the Panaca title by re-
ferences to decisions OF the Courts, and
pointing out the evidences and infer
ences OF forfeiture and Abandonment
Did not the plaintiffs know that their
pr edecessors had abandoned the Panaca
title? Have they not, in the papers in
the McDermott case. solemnly sworn that
the Panaca had been abandoned and
forfeited? They knew what they were
doing when they swore to those papers,
and they wouid not have sworn to vi
cious lie. We must believe that what
they swore to they believed in all SINGER
ity. Mr.. Bull, the President of the Ray
mond l. Ely Company, is not the man
who will swear to thing merely because
an attorney tells him to do SO. Reads
from affidavit OF Alpheus Bull made in
the McDermott case. Here, you will
observe, Mr.. Bulls evidence is without
qualification. He swears positively, and
of his own knowledge, that the plain
titfs never entered into or held the
| ground, or any portion Of it, under the
Panaca title; but they claimed it under
the Mammoth, Justice and Monitor titles,
as well as the Lightner location OF Sep
TENDER, 1871, and did not recognize the
Panaca title as good and valid. The
title of Hainlin, Pulsifer aud Vandemark
is called by Mr.. Bull "a pretended title"
Reads affidavit Of Moulder, the Secre-
tary of the Raymond 4 Ely Company. !
Here MIR. Moulder says he knows the
statements of Mr.. Bull in his affidavit to
be true, and he thereby re-affirms them :"
These are the solemn nsseverations of the
officers of the corporation plaintiff, who
must have known all about Its property,
interests and claims. Why. if that Nc
Dermott case had been tried, the parties
plaintiff in this case, would have come
into Court and contested the validity of
the Panaca title, just Us We are doing
feat would have followed. The answer
in the McDermott case utterly denies
that the Panaca location covered
this ground, denies that the Panaca lode
was legally located or is identical with
the one in dispute. The Panaca title is
created by them in that case as myth,
and it is there denied that subsequent de-
velopment has proved that the course Of
said Panaca ledge is easterly. which is
the admitted direction OF the ledge in
controversy. This answer, prepared last
November, for use in the McDermott
case by plaintiff, denies that plaintiffs have
ever worked on any part of the discovery
claim of Hamlin, Pulsifer and their assoc
ciates, or threaten or intend 30 to do.
| The complaint in the Kentucky case was
then read showing that on the 7th of DC.
tober, 1872 plaintiff by their own averment
had worked the ledge as far west as the
Kentucky shaft. This was in effect q
denial OF the existence of the Panaca title
then.
Now, gentlemen, in conclusion, allow
me to say have seen nothing in the evil
dence or in the conduct of the parties in.
volved, to warrant the personal charges
which have been made here against Mr..
Perley, Mr.. Lightner or Mr.. Heal It.
These charges, in my judgment, have
nothing to do with the proper decision
OF this case. Let your verdict decide
whether this Panaca title be good or bad.
AFTERNOON SESSION.
synopsis Of Judge Garber's Remarks.
Never, since the great trial commenced,
was there so dense throng as had gath
cred on the afternoon of this day, to hear
Judge CARRIER close the argument. The
passage-ways to the Courtroom were
blocked IN hour before the opening of
Court, and large number, unable to
get seats, stood up, occupying every
available space, throughout his remarks
He opened by saying that in rising 10
close the argument, he only asked of the
jury the attention which had been ac-
corded the attorneys of the opposite side.
He said the defendants side Of the case
had been managed by counsel of great
ability and reputation, but that he pro-
posed to drive these eloquent Apostles Of
wrong from every position they had
taken. He did not say this from conf
dence in his own ability, but he felt in
spired by the justice OF the cause he
sspoused, and knew his effort could not
fail.
First, as to the charge that we are the
hired slanderers OF certain parties de-
PENDANT. Gentlemen, you, and all in
! telliRent men who understand the nature
of this case, know that charge to be
slanderously false. We have only per-
formed our simple duties as the faith
full attorneys Of our clients. So far as
we are concerned these evidences Of
those gentlemen's violations OF sacred
trusts, have only gone to the world under
the sacred sanction Of official duty.
What have We done but put into legal
form and shape, by making them dis
tinct and specific allegations, what has
! for months been common talk in the
streets OF Phoebe and San Franciscop
Those whose regulations are involved
are here with eloquent counsel TO defend
them. Are those accusations false?
Then, If they are innocent. they ought,
as would become honest and honorable
men, to be glad Of this opportunity
to disprove them. We are now
before jury Of twelve men,
sworn to be impartial and dis