Eureka daily sentinel. [volume] (Eureka, Nev.) 1871-1887, 1874-05-30

II uue SuutEO uuMnel NOu1uNOy-lnC
Tunnel Condemned as Failure
The Mining Companies Ask to
he Relieved from Paying Royal.
ty-synop>is Of the Complaints.
From the San Francisco Bulletin, May 26 !
Nine actions were commenced in the
Fifteenth District Court to day by min
! ing companies located on the Com
stock lode against the Sutro Tunnel
\ Company and others, to cancel certain
|. agreements between the plaintiffs and
defendants in respect to the building
of SutrO tunnel, the payment of royal
Nv, and to relieve plaintiffs and their
property from the burden of paying
said royalty. The plaintiffs in these
actions are the Crown Point. Savage,
Ophir, Gould Il Curry. Hale Il Nor
cross, Chollar-Potosi, Imperial, Over
man, and Yellow Jacket companies.
The defendants are the Sutro Tunnel
Company, Adolph Sutro, Henry X.
Mitchell, Louis Janin, Jr., and William
NJ. Stewart. The suits are brought by
Wilson Il Wilson, counsel; X. S. Mes
sick, !. NJ. uoge, and $. NJ. Wilson, OF
counsel.
THE GROUND OF ACTION.
The complaint in each case alleges
that plaintiff is a body polite and cor
porate, organized and doing business
under An act to provide for the
formation of corporations for certain
purposes" approved April II, 1853.
That plaintiff is the owner of de-
sigrated mine in the city of Virginia,
county Of Storey, State of Nevada, and
that numerous other corporations. as
sociations, companies, and individuals,
during all the time hereinafter men
toned, were owners and interested in
q her portions Of said ComStOck lode.
That on February I, 1865, Sutro con-
ceived the project Of constructing a
tunnel from Il point at the foothills Of
the Carson River Valley into the Com
stock lode, and of sinking mining
shafts along the line Of the tunnel and
c,nnecting Herewith, fer the purpose
of the discovery and development of
other lodes OF precious minerals
(which by law, custom, and usage CT
she State of Nevada would, on such
discovery, become the property of Su-
trO and his associates), and for the pur-
pose of inducing corporations and per-
sons having interests in the Comstock
lode, to patrOnize and avail themselves
of the advantages OF the tunnel at rates
and prices to be agreed upon.
That Sut,o procured the passage Of
an act by the Legislature of Nevada,
entitled - An act granting the right OF
way and authorizing \. Sutro and his
associates to construct mining and
draining tunnel," approved February
1, 1868.
That in 1866, Sutro and the other
named defendants together with ID. +.
Avery, since deceaSedD associated
themselves together for the purpose of
running and completing the tunnel, in
accordance with the terms and cOndi-
lions OF tho legislative enactment.
That before this time the mine Of
plaintiff was greatly affected with IA
flow of water, aud was in need of bet
rr ventilation, and was supplied with
hOisting works of simple character and
quite limited power. That Sutro and
his associates represented to plaintiff
that they could complete the tunnel
within eight years from the date of the
at and in accordance therwith, ,bywhich
means the mine would be drained and
ventilated, and access to and from ii
would be greatly facilitated, and the
labor and expense of plaintiff greatly
reduced. An agreement in writing
was accordingly entered into between
plaintiff and defendants, which was
properly acknowledged and recorded
thcr averred that in 1865, at request of
defendants, plaintiff extended the time
mentioned in the agreement to August
LIST, 1865.
Plaintiff AYERS that it has in all things
performed the covenants in said agree
inent, but that defendants failed to per-
form their promises therein in this:
That they did not commence the work
on August 1st, 1868, nor did
they prosecute the work with
reasonable energy or vigor; nor
were the tunnels and drifts men
toned in the agreement completed or
put in condition for Use, i'll accordance
with the provisions Of the act; but, on
the contrary, little Of the work has
been done, and that little feebly ana
without energy, and at great intervals
OF delay, without just cause. 1t is fur
ther averred that, previous to August
l>t, 1865, nor since, has there been sub
scribed in good faith, or by RESPONSE
bio persons, nearly as large sum as
S3,0OO, 900, nor any amount sufficient to
complete the one-fifth part of the work
required under the agreement; that
not even ten per cent. of S3,WO,Ooo has
been paid i'll cash, or any sum approx
imating that percentage. 1t Is also
averred that during the first year,
commencing August lst, lsoS, there
We're expended less than four hundred
dollars en- account of the work, and
that each succeeding year not S2W,OOu
have been expended on the WORK, OF
any sum approximating that amount.
That defendants have failed to furnish
plaintiffany statement whatever OF the
expenditures made on account of the
work.
Plaintiff AYERS that it was provided
in the agreement that it the work
should not be commenced before Au-
gust lst, 1865, or if during any year DC
PENDANTS should fail to eNpend the sum
OF money agreed to be expended, the
agreement should, at the option oi
plaintiff, cease and determine.
II is averrcd that the work was moi
COmnlnnacd aecordiNC 10 the 1Sreo-