Gold Hill daily news. [volume] (Gold Hill, N.T. [Nev.]) 1863-1882, 1874-08-06
TUNNEL LAW.


w. publish this evening q letter vri'-
ten from Virginia City to the San iran
cisco Ala. upon the subject OF the Sa.
Tunnel, its history, present eondiu0n
and its prospects. 1t is from the pen
~ ON, Of the sblesi lawyers in Nevada
and siyss A clear legal view OF the case
although. Of necessity. somewhat OF the
history Of this great swindle is repro
d,o.a' With his views as to the duty
Of our press and people we are in COM
ple,s accord. The Tunnel. its franchise
and all its property, have been mort
oas.d for 50, 00o. 900. bonds issued there
on, and stock offered for sale in Euro
pesn markets. Az the lawyer says, this
is all well enough. il the parties who
buy these bonds know anything Of Whit
they are obtaining. But. as is always
the case. ~three-fourths of the purehas-
ers are OF the laboring classes, persons
Of small means. who arc neither able.
nor can they be expected to investigate
closely into the financial condition OF
the sutro Tunnel Company and its
guarantees for r~ecompsnse upon money
invested. 1t is to advise such. by set
ting forth the true status OF the sutro
Tunnel Company, considered with
reference o us ies'A rsn's' supposed 70
arise under The act OF 1900 oy virtue oil
which It claims royalty mat this letter
Is written
We ave not space u gave even an
abstract oil TINS document IL Is Wen
written. MOI o'eruohe' N VIII 'ofce
conviction upon every one who reads IL
carefully. IL shows that Mr.. susro hav-
ing mad a contract with certain mining
companies upon the Coms'ock o TO
run a tunnel within a specified time,
broke said contract; that time was OF the
essence OF the contract; that after max
ing this agreement, and before entering
upon its performance, Sutro acted in
bad faith. He gave out that he was 60
ing East to raise capital rs he had
agreed. but instead went direct to WASH
incton CITY and procured the passage OF
the law Of 1866, tn. royalty Act. The
m.n,s, In which hi. law was drafted
disclosed a nurpose an su.ro's mar, TO OBJ
,.;, =, nraua ADVANTAGE ovar IN. min.
IN, .om,on;ss which therefore. 40 soon
..,h. an. sn.o;s.ai q, ,ho contract, had
-, u,..u.o, ,ho,, o,,;o, 10 TAR
u,,n.,. a.. .on,,.r, ana 40 ro,;saa sn.
-, ~. ...o.;.,.s w. ..n ~s.,sc,.,
.,,.n,;on A. ,ha on;r;o, ~ the Am,
o-or..norao,, =. a The validity Of this
,.xotIsee VI. .hows CLEARLY and .a..
,.,.,,o,;I, aha, ,hs ROYALTY clause there.
q, %. .nd 4. a.nspd.nt unon the con.
tract: that the nto OF charge not beine
designated in the Law. reference must b,
had therefor, to the agreement betwOer
sutro and the mining companies. Thii
contract ared the rate at two dollars pc
ton. But at the time the law was passet
(having reference to this contract) tn,
terms OF the agreement were yet uncom
piled with. On Sutro's part they still
remain so. and the time has passeC
when its stipulations can be executed b.
him. No rule Of law is better settles
than that which says that in referring I.
m instrument its contents must b
taken A. a whole. II ROYALTY is elaimo,
undsr IN. law. the amount can only b,
aseert.ined by reference TO the contract
upon whose conditions. andin referenc,
10 which. tn. law was passed. withou
ref.rr;ng 10 ths contract. the net O.
July. 1866. grants no ROYALTY whatever
conr,... .s,,.;nIv ala moi inland h
80, A. s,,,o o-s,,.;, r,v.,,v xi,hou,
-r.on,Jn, .-ous,h;n, IN ,s,u,n VIVA,
ara. ,.,n;.;,;on p,.;rlv N. IN,
aum-.,L ~. .,,,,,..o,. - ,ha a.,
tract. Otherwise and II Congress haS
intended mat me law should D
UNCONDITIONAL why was the amount o
royalty not In the ACT
why was reference made 70 an agree
ment previously or which might there
after DO q Solely, II would seem,