Eureka daily sentinel. [volume] (Eureka, Nev.) 1871-1887, 1877-08-28
THE OPINION.
Pull Text of the Document

img Company. o: Nevada.
This Is an action of ejectment fer the
possession Of certain mining ground,
particularly described in the COM
plant, situated in Eureka Mining Dis
trict In the county of Eureka, in the
State of Nevada. The plaintiff is a
corporation created under the laws of
California, and the defendant, the
Richmond Mining Company, is a cor
poration created under the laws Of Ne
vada. The other defendants, Thomas
Wren and Joseph Potts, are citizens Of
the latter State. The action VAS origi
nally commenced in the state Court Of
Nevads. but upon application of the
plaintiff, and upon the ground OF its
incorporation in another State, and
presumed citizenship, from that fact,
of its corporators or stockholders i'm
that State, it was transferred to the
Circuit Court of the United States.
The complaint In the State Court, in
duuitiOii W tio uSuai oiiosot'ouS I a
declaration In ejectment, set forth
various grounds upon which was
based . prayer for an order restraining
the defendants from working the
premises in controversy pending the
action. The defendants. in their answer
to the complaint, not only denied the
title of the plaintiff, but made various
averments upon which a like restraint
ing order against the plaintiff vas
asked. Both orders were granted.
This union of Q demand in ejectment
for the property In controversy with n
prayer for provisional equitable relief,
il permitted by the system Of pro-
cedure which obtains in the State, thus
saving the parties the necessity of liti.
eating in two suits what can As readily
and less extensively he accomplished
in one. But this uniOn Is not permit
ted IN the Federal Courts; and upon
the transfer of the present action, the
plesdingS of the plaintiff were amend
Ell by substituting n regular complaint
in ejectment on the law side of the
Court; and u bill was Gled for an in.
Junction on its equity side. The de-
PENDANTS answered both, and also filed
a cross-bill for an injunction against
the plaintiff.
BY arrangement of the parties. the
defendants, Messrs. Wren and Potts,
are dropped out of the controversy.
and their names may be stricken from
the pleadings. The claim for damages
is also waived in this action, without
prejudice to any future proceedings
with respect to them. BY stipulation,
the case at law-the action of eject
ment-is tried by the Court without the
Intervention of jury. and the judges
sit at San Francisco, instead of Carson,
their finding and judgment to be an
tered in term time in the latter place
as though the case were heard and de-
cided there. The testimony taken in
the action at law is to be received a.
depositicns in the equity suit, and both
cases are to be disposed of at the same
time, to the end that the whole contrO-
versy between the parties may be SET
tied at once.
The premises in controversy are of
great value, amounting by estimation
o several hundred thousands Of dol
lars, and the case has been prepared
for trial with u care propor:ionate to
this estimate of the value of the prop
erty; and the trial has been conducted
by counsel on both sides with eminent
ability.
Whatever could inform, instruct or
enligiiten the Court, has been present
ed by them. Practical miners have
given us their testimony as to the 10
cation and working OF the mine. Men
of science have explained to us how it
Was probable that nature in her pro
cesses had deposited the mineral where
it is found. Models OF glass have
made the hill, where the mining
ground lies, transparent, so that we
have been able to trace the course of
the veins, and zee the chambers Of ore
found in its depths. For myself, after
q somewhat extended judicial expert
ence, covering now a period of nearly
twenty years. l can say that l have
seldom, If ever, seen a case involving
the consideration of so many and
varied particulars, more thorOugbly
prepared or more ably presented.
And what has added a charm to the
whole trial has been the conduct OF
counsel on both sides, who have ap-
peared to assist each other in the de.
velopment of the facts of the case, and
have furnished an illustration of the
truth that the highest courtesy is con-
sistent with the most earnest conten-
ton.
The mining ground which forms the
subject Of controversy is situated In a
hill known as Ruby Hill, a
spur of Prospect mountain, distant
about two miles from the town OF Eu-
reka, in Nevada. Prospect mountain
Is several miles in length, running in
a northerly and southerly course. Ad-
joining it's northerly end is this spur
called Ruby Hill, which extends
thence westerly, or in q south westerly
direction. Along and through this
hill for y distance slightly exceeding a
mile, 10 q zone of Limestone in which,
at different places throughout its
length, and in various forms, mineral
Is found, this mineral appearing sore
times In continuous veins, sometimes
In apparently isolated chambers, and
1t other times In what would seem TO
be scattered grains. And our princi
pal inquiry Is to ascertain the charac
ter Of this zone, In order to determine
whether II Ia to be treated az cOnsti-
tutiDg lode. OF as embracing sew
eral lodes. a. hat term is used in the
Acts Of Congress Of 1866 aud 1872, un
der which the parties have acquired
whatever ria hts they possess. In this
inquiry the first thing to be settled is