Arizona weekly citizen., 1882-04-16
Vim. King rs. Geo. ". AtkIusou of all.

but to miners generally throughout the country. As the case in point has 10 precedent it thus becomes the more i'm portant In July, 1879, Chas. King To- cated the Mocking Bird mine, near where now stands the town Of Harshaw, and iu connection with the mine located the Mocking Bird mill site, over which much of the town of Hsrshaw is now built. the supposed house and lot owners in that part of Harshaw covering the mill site named, d,becoming co-defendants. King was the original locator and owner sf the millsite, and brought suit for eject ment and costs of suit, winch were by a unanimous verdict of the jury awarded hIm on the 4th of this April, but upon application a stay of execution was granted for thirty days. The objections raised against the claims put forward by King was that it was mineral land and that no work had been done on said mill site and that by noncompliance with the law his title was voided. The Court, however, held that the law has no enact ments looking to the working of mill sites, or any part whatever, but that they must be located and held in conjunction with mining claim and that the validity of title rests equally in each. In case of forfeiture of mining claim title fer the non-performance of the work legally re- quired, the title to the millsite also and at the same time, becomes void. But as on the Mocking Bird mine the needful work had been regularly done, and as it was proven that the millsife in question was located on non-mineral land, the Court and !nry sustained the rights of King and declared all others to be interlopers.
 According, then. to this decision, it is made plain that millsites if simply held as such must be made on non-mineral land, and they can then be held for an ! indefinite time without the performance of any work whatsoever, provided that the mines in conjunction with which it was located be worked as required by law. If the millslte land be mineralized it must be worked us the law relating to mineral lands prescribes, otherwise it reverts to the public domain and subject to relocation by the first conner.
 At the time that King made his loca- tions the town of Harshaw had not been thought of, but at later date the dis covery of the famous Hermosa peopled the canyon which had hitherto been known to few, and as the Mocklng Bird millsite offered an advantageous location for town, people crowded in, and regard less of the priority of the claims put for ward by King; staked and fenced lots, and built many houses, both for business and dwelling purposes. King entered suit as stated and after year and a half in which he was three times allowed to amend his complaint, came out victor iOus.
 In the finding of the jury the mill-slte in point IS described as being "All that certain tract or parcel of land lying and l being situa,e in the Harshaw Mining 1 district, county of Pima, Territory of l Arizona, and more particularly described 1 as follows: Commencing at a monument l, Of stones about ten teet westerly from 1 the southwest corner of the Trench mill | site, and about 400 feet scutherly from | the old Trench smelting works. and run ming southerly 300 feet; thence easterly eco feet; thence northerly 80 feet: I thence westerly eco feet; said tract of | land being known and recorded as the l MonkinG Rird mill -site. HarshauD Minina, district Pima county, Arizona, July 10. l 1879, together with said plaintiffs costs and disbursements incurred in this &C., tion, to the sum of S277.70, and all &C., cruing costs"
 The defendant being Geo. W Atkln- son, H. F. Lentz, Henry Haupt, Wm. Kane, s. G. Lewis, L. c. McBain, P. J. McNamee, J. D. Reeves, J. T. Cawthorn, D. Rae, Geo. H. Stephens, Wm. FerriIl, Ed. Rawson, Jas. T. Abel, J. A. Molly, J. DeLowry, E. Oakes, R. Presho, J. McIn- tosh, J. W. Davis, E. A. Marshall, P. Car. zabon, J. Doe Leary, Mrs, c. O'Halloran, R. Roe Brown, R. c. Pearson and Jno. Doe Whittier. The case on behalf of the plaintiff was argued and conducted by the law firm of Hereford & Zabriekie, who notwithstanding the difficulties and veIatious delays consistently pressed the suit to a successful ending and obtained a decision on a case vitally important to every prospector, miner or owner of mines in Arizona or elsewhere in the United States. It is reported that the were considering the advis- ability of carrying the question to a higher court, but later on aveexpressed a desire to compromise and thus avoid the consequent litigation of an appeal. The jury that sat in judgment on the case are among our best ci:Izens and the verdict given, by which King was rein stated in the possession of his property was made in accordance with their Judg- nent of the law and the facts of the case.
 
 THE Phenix Gazette says: Yesterday morning, Sheriff Orme received from