Eureka daily sentinel. [volume] (Eureka, Nev.) 1871-1887, 1881-05-07
THE BIG LEDGE THEORY AGAIN
AFFIRMED.
Every Material Point in Favor of
the Albion.
THE TIP TOP LINE THE PROPER DIVISION
BETWEEN THE COMPANIES.
THE ST. GEORGE PATENT DE
CLARED TO BE VOID.
THE INJUNCTION CONTINUED AGAINST the
ALBION ON A TECHNICALLY.
FULL TEXT OF THE OPINION,

Judge Rising's decision was received
yesterday morning by express. 1t was
opened and filed by the Clerk Immediately
upon its receipt. As will be seen, the de-
cision decides every material question in
favor Of the Albion. 1t is precisely what
the SENTINEL has commended il would be
from the close of the trial until date.
Judge Rising states in terms that he
should have rendered a clean-cut verdict
in favor Of the Albion for everything
northwesterly Of the Tip Top had the
power been vested in him. He had doubts
on this technical point, and 80 continued
the injunctions against both parties until
the final hearing on the merits. Follow
ing is the decision in full:
Sixth District Court-Richmond Company
Of Nevada vs.. Albion Consolidated Com
pany-Richmond Company vs.. Albion
Company-E. H. Rose ct al. vs.. Rich
mond Company Of Nevada.
The cases were heard upon rules to show
cause for injunction pendente lite between
the respective parties, and for the pur-
poses of decision were consolidated.
The property in controversy i, situated
upon Ruby Hill, Eureka Mining District,
and is q limestone formation, containing
well defined boundaries of quartzite and
shale. The ore bodies are found by cross
cutting in the limestone from wall to wall
at varied and uncertain distances from
each other.
In the case of the Eureka Con. Company
vs.. The Richmond Company, the character
and nature Of this mining ground was de-
by the Circuit Court to be q vein
or ledge within the meaning of the Act Of
Congress Of 1872. The U. s. Supreme
Court has recently affirmed this decision,
The testimony introduced upon the hear
ing Of these cases before me established
OF the Circuit Court upon this issue
is followed and adopted.
The Richmond Company claim the dis
puted ground by virtue Of the " Virgins"
and "Poorman" locations, the "St.
George patent, and several other claims,
but which are subordinate to the "Uncle
The Albion Company bases its
ownership to the same premises upon the
g Uncle Sam location, which it owns.
The cases were so ably and thoroughly
and presented to the Court by the
counsel engaged, that / deem it
to express my opinion, though I
do so as concisely as possible, as to
the merits Of some OF the asserted rights.
The Richmond Company is the owner OF
the Tip Top patented claim, which is
the northerly one OF the series OF claims
owned by the Richmond. 1t was a seri-
ously contested point where the westerly
Or northwesterly end line OF the Tip Top
be established. The Richmond
it to be the line as defined in the
the Albion ~contending that the Tip
Top location was originally made, and the
stakes placed. at positions twelve feet
'outherly from the patent line. As an
bounced during the trial, the westerly or
lorthwesterly course as described in the
Zip Top patent will be adopted and fixed
"a the extreme limit Of the Richmond
ground, horizontally and YER
ically, and as the line which must control
IS applying to the injunction to be issued.
from this line lies the ground
n contention. The virginia" is q prior To-
to the "Uncle SAM" hav-
ng been made about December, 1859.
rhe Richmond Company claims
hat this location contains 1,400
eet in length, and to extend 29S
eet over and upon disput ted territory.
That the notice OF location was placed ct
What was called the +" Iron Shaft" q n
,ing northerly, while the Albion insisted
md proved the fact that the "virginia"
~ocation was made only to cover any va
amt ground that there might be between
he Lookout " and Richmond" claims,
md was Of the length only Of those
The Virginia notice OF location
,alls for the "Mayfower" as one bound
ny and the Champion" as the other.
The Champion" lies to the southerly
md the Mayfower" to the northerly OF
he Richmond and Lookout locations.
The boundaries as called for in the notice
will control the limits and extent Of the
especially when the testimony as
o where the location was really made
8 conflicting. From that and
,ther testimony adduced upon the
conclude that the
Virginia claim, as located, does not In
clude or embrace any Of the ground in
controversy; that the Richmond COM
has no right or claim to any part OF
his property by reason OF the Virginia
,laim. The Poorman was located in 1869,
md is a claim nearly alright angles with
he other locations, and its side lines
would become the end lines. The Poor
nan covers only a portion Of the ground,
so far as appears its boundaries were
never defined or fixed. Some work was
lone upon the claim until 1874. Among
,ther serious and fatal objections urged
against the validity or vitality OF the
claim Is the one that upon the application
'or a patent having been made, which az
the Poorman ground, the Poorman
company having failed to protest, it re-
suited that any adverse right claimed by
he Poorman company would thereby be
'orfeited. The "Uncle Sam " was located
January IA, 1879, by Rose and two asso-
,iates. The claim was made for 800 feet
On the ledge by 200 feet wide. The Act OF
Congress OF 1865 gave to each locator 200
feet on the vein and an additional claim OF
400 feet for discovery. The locsti~o hay-
been made for 800 feet, ii il commended
by the Richmond company that 1t Is In
valid because 200 feet Of ground was taken
In excess of that allowed by law. 1t was
shown that Rose did work on this ground
six months before the location was
and discovered what he claimed to
be- 4 ledge. He considered it q discovery;
subsequently, he made this location for 800
claiming the additional 400 feet for
the discovery, although the notice itself
does not so mention. The evidence ad-
was competent and sufficient to
satisfactorily explain why 800 feet instead
600 feet had been appropriated the
fact established being that the additional
200 fest was for discovery-and I am
aware of NO rule OF law which would re-
quire that fact to be stated In the notice
or operate as q forfeiture OF the
location II not done. The proof Is ample
to sustain the validity OF the Uncle sam
location for 800 feet by 200 feet wide.
II was insisted that the Uncle Sam Com
had claimed different lines for their
claim at different periods. Upon making the
location, Rose selected the place where he
had first done his prospecting-a small
hole then in the center OF his claim; after
the location he commenced o shaft at this