The daily Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1873-1877, 1875-01-28
The WAINWRIGHT Riot Case.

1ne wainwright xk1ot case.
At the last session of the grand jury in
his county six persons-Isaac Wainwright
and his sons and his sons in law, of Hamp-
.on,-were indicted for riot, in that they
forcibly prevented men in the employ of
Mr.. Taylor Williams of Sterling, local OPP
eratorl from working upon a coal shaft |
Williams had commenced on their land.
The indictment was procured by Mr.. Will
Jams, who employed Sweeney & jackson
to assist States Atty Parmenter in prose
cutting them. Mr.. Wainwright employed
E. H. Johnston, of Port Byron, and Con-
nelly & McNeal, of this city to defend the
case.
During the trial Mr.. Jackson introduced
a written contract between Isaac VAIN
wright, of the first part. and Taylor Will
Jams of the second part, to prove or show
that Williams had rights upon the proper
ty and therefore that the Wainwright party
had no right to interfere with his men.
This contract is dated Dec. 80, 1873. and
leases ninety acres of land, in Hampton,to
Williams for coal purposes. Williams was
to pay one cent bushel royalty; work out
the coal in 10 years if he could; if not he
was to have 10 years more, or as much
time as might be necessary to get it out.
In the cont ract is the following clause
And the said party of the second part (Williamsl
covenants and agrees that he will enter upon said
land within year from the date OF these presents
| and prospect and search for coal aud within one
year to determine whether coal exists IN under OF
upon said land in sufficient quantities to warrant
the party of the second part (Wlliams) to proceed
in mining operations, and if SO to proceed to open
shaft or shafts and take coa therefrom and as much
as is icable; otherwise to surrender and cancel
this lease to and with the party of the first part
Williams claimed that before the year
expired he had commenced digging shaft
and that he had determined within him
self that coal existed there I'm sufficient
quantities to warrant him in proceeding il
mining operations" and that he had ;
right to be there and that the Wainwright
had no right to interfere with him or hi
men. He had done nothing, upon this land
towards carrying out the contract, excep
to commence sinking a shaft, about a weel
or two before the year expired. He hat
discovered no coal on the land.
Mr.. jackson asked the court to instruc
the jury that Williams had rights there
The court declined to construe the con
tract, but expressed doubt as to Will
lams's view Of his rights being correct
Whereupon the prosecution suddenly abar
doned the case and nolle pros was enter
ed.
Mr., Williams says he shall now con
mence civil action to secure his rights.
How the courts will construe the claus
from the contract, above quoted, of cours
/. we cannot say. but We venture an opinio
V that the word determine, " inthe oontrac
/ means Ascertain, find out, or s'disco7
: err" and that Mr. Williamss opinion or b.
d lief that coal exists there has nothing VIA
l. ever to do with the ease. He believe
J., that coal existed there when he leased ii
:. land or he would not have leased it an
f our judgment of the contract is that /
!. was to 60 to work at once, or within reason
able time for preparation, and positiyel
= find out or ascertain if coal existed thel
r in paying quantities, and if it did to pl
l. down shaft and take out as much coal /;
d was practicable within the first yea
4 Why? Because Mr.. Wainwright wante
n the royalty; wanted his revenue to con
ar mence. He would be lacking 10 bushes
capacity to give man 10 years to find O,
y whether coal existed in the land or not, an
l. thus cut himself off from working it hin
ii self