Pioche daily record. [volume] (Pioche, Nev.) 1872-1876, 1873-04-26

vested by virtue Of "A thousand dollars
worth of labor-by actual development.
The ground on which no work bad been
done was, of course, forfeited. SO their
talk about galvaniziDg into new existence /
all those old claims. the aggregate extent /
o! which they have eAultingly published
to the world in the Phoebe RECORD, is all /
for Effect 1t can have no weight,
gentlemen Of the jury, with you, nor any
one else of good sense. We do not, |
never have, and never shall, claim IA foot |
of ground which is not ours by the solid |
rights, through ourselves and our grant |
oIs, of actual possession aud develop
meIt. Reads the consolidation con-
tract Under this agreement, it is
needless TO say to you that work on any
one If the consolidated claims was, I'M
der the Congressional Mining Law, as
well as general mining customs, the same
rs work on all. Now, gentlemen, out
side of ali these facts and considerations
this testimony from their own wit
nesses, as well as our own--which would
make us secure in our property against
adverse claimants of any character, will
again direct your attention to
the law which wisely and justly
incapacitated these men, while acting as
our agents, from setting up adverse
rights. call your attention to the evil
dence of Colonel Lightner, from which
you will STE that he first knew of the
negotiation by Hearst for the Monitor on
the 18th day Of September, 1871. Reads
you the evidence Of Lightner as fur
nished by the shorthand reporter, show
ing that Lightner's first information con-
corning the purchase of the Monitor was
/ derived from John Cahill on the morn
ing OF the 18th Of September, 1871; and
that he met Hearst the same afternoon.
From this evidence and the deeds which
| will now show you, propose to main
tain that the whole arrangement concern
ing the purchase of the Monitor and the
concentration of the Hermes title in
Hearst was one and the same identical
transaction. l now submit to you the
deeds from the locators of the Hermes,
from which you will see that by one de-
scription, iii one handwriting, ON the
saline day that Lightner first saw Hearst,
the whole of the Hermes title was con-
centrated in Perlev, McCannon and
LigLtner and in few days afterwards
concentrated in Hearst himself and on
the same day that the whole of these
titles were concentrated in Hearst, for
the purpose of lulling the Raymond &
Ely Company into security, Lightner
caused Il portion of the very ground in
dispute to be located and recorded for
the Raymond 4 Ely Company. Now, to
prove that the whole transaction began
on the day Lightner first met Hearst, and
that it was only one transaction, let us look
at the dates of the several conveyances
This is the deed from Rives to Perley,
! dated September 10, 1871, granting to
Perley his interest in the Hermes
Hands the deed to the jury This is
. the decd of Easterlan and Tardos &c
Lightner, and is inthe same form exactly
, is in the same handwriting, and it is
dated September -. Hands it to thu
jury This is the deed of Martin t.
, McCannon, dated the 18th of September
and the form and description are tn;
, same as Of the others. Now, gentlemen
: pretend to say that all these deeds wer
+ written on the same day--on the 18th o
= September-the very day that all inter
, ests in the Hermes, by agreement witt
, George Hearst, were concentrated in tn
e hands of Perley, Lightner and McCan
Y non. Then was the whole scheme con
4 cocted. Now, l again call your attention
4 to written evidence. The stub-booh O
g the Raymond Il Ely Company shows tina
$ the 1000 draft was drawn by Lightne
in favor of George Hearst on the 18th O
4 September, 1871, for the purchase Of tn
j, Monitor. The same day Hearst swear
# that he paid the money from Wells
h Fargo & Co. S office for his purchase
Il The memorandum of Sides shows Thu
II Hearst did not draw his draft until tn
Il 18th of September, though it seems clea
); that Sides paid the Slavonaus ON til
= 18th, the day Lightner's check was drawn
6 and Hearst admits that he intended fo
y Lightner's check to pay his own. Thu
i we see that Hearst paid $40, 900 of Ray
5 mond & Ely money for COO feet of Mon
!; tor ground, and received $4,000 prof
r and conveyed only one-third of his pun
l. chase to the Raymond & Ell
II Company and the other two-third
o were conveyed to the Hermes
f. Here, now, is the deed from Perley t
It Hearst Reads. This is McCannon
=, deed. These deeds are all to Georg
Y Hearst and dated the 25th day of Sci
g. TENDER, and on that day the ledge struc
h in the Lightner shaft was recorded i
n the name of the Raymond d Ely Con
d pany, and it extended west 400 feet, an
X l64 feet of that very ground is now en-
d braced in the Hermes. This deed frol
n Rives to Perley, take notice, we new,
t? had record OF until the 3lst Of la
le December, eighteen or nineteen da,
rs before this suit was brought. Real
" location of the ledge struck in the Ligh
t? ner shaft. Now, gentlemen, it is fl
you to consider these facts and dates, al
upon them conclude whether there WI
a not community of interest among &
ID the parties concerned in this intriguin
OF and if you find there was, then all Il
10 parties engaged in it are as much disqui
flied, under the law, to build up adyer
o. rights, as our agents themselves.
to Mr.. Hearst says that Colonel Ra
c. mond offered to come into the Herm
le Company for So, 600 and one-thhd of Il
ne stock; Colonel Raymond says he ma,
ID no such offer. Now, which is RICH
10 Reads Colonel Lightner's letter of Il
Is Sth of December, urging Colonel Ra
is mond to come into it. This letter urg
~ Colonel Raymond to accept one-third
re the Hermes stock in the name of son
ci- friend, as it would be to his (Lightner'
Id interest if he would do so, and couldl
it injure the Raymond & Ely Company,
IS the Punaca title was perfectly good, al
is. would force the Hermes further we!
re- If Colonel Raymond hid offered to ia
as one-third-and that was what the co
IS spirators wanted-why wasn't the co
to tract closed? The Hermes men we
IN. anxious, and always had been, to {
of Colonel Raymond into their corporatio
he Now, look at Greaves' connection wi
SITS the affair. Mr.. Perley writes to t
rs, company at San Francisco, sayi
nd "Greaves has run off without deciding
he the company, as he agreed to, No. 3
we the Phoebe West. He agreed to deed
I'M the company both Nos. 3 and 4, and \
we 4 l bave now. l intended both
by the company. OF course l expected a lit
ID? more than fees" But on the sixth