Eureka daily sentinel. [volume] (Eureka, Nev.) 1871-1887, 1882-06-03
THE SAME OLD ISSUES.
THOSE QUERIES OF sINQUIRER"
POINTEDLY ANSWERED.

How that Little Game at Wash.
fngton of the Richmond Hench-
men Seemed to Work, but Ends in
n FizzIe.
Inquirer's "Query or two Of yesterday
consist of seventeen questions, and are SO
ingeniously put that they must emanate
from a prominent legal gentleman OF our
town, whose aptitude at legal bubbles is
we'll known. To answer these queries or
bubbles in detail would take up more
space than we can spare, so we will con-
tent ourselves with such comments or an
swers as come readily to our mind, and II
in so doing we answer plainly, we can only
say time and space will not allow US to do
otherwise.
Is the result of the writ of error as it new
stands to leave the Albion master OF the sltua-
ton?
We answer, yes. AS it has a Judgment
of our Supreme Court in its favor, declar-
ing it the legal and equitable owner OF the
land and mine in dispute, also declaring
the so-called title of Richmond a sham,
and as it has the Richmond perpetually
enjoined from again trespassing upon it
or extracting, either openly or surrepti-
tiously, any ore from it.
May we confidently look for lively times in
the Albion when the three cases now pending
in Judge Riyes' Court are disposed Of?
We answer, yes. AS it is we'll known
that large and valuable ore bodies exist in
the disputed ground. The fact was estab.
lished fully in Carson before the Chief
Justice of our State when he fixed the
damages which would accrue to Albion at
nearly half a million dollars, if it was kept
from working it pending appeal to the
United States Supreme Court. And in
this view he was Endorsed by his brother
Justices and by all who heard the testi-
mony. No one except a Richmond parti-
san thinks otherwise, and if an one be-
lieves that these ore bodies will not, in
their extraction, transportation and reduc-
ton contribute to the prosperity OF Eu-
reka, or, in other words, make lively times
at the Albion, he must be either a stupid
or an idiot.
When are the three cases likely to be disposed
of?
We can only answer never, if the efforts
and tactics of the counsel of the Richmond
Company could be presumed to influence
our District Court to do SO great a wrong
to the Albion or our community as not to
hear and determine them.
Is the Richmond mine exhausted, or is the
wish father to the thought with the SENTINEL?
If the sworn statement of Mr.. Wescoatt
before the Supreme Court at Carson,
coupled with the like sworn statement of
Mr.. Longley (the first the Assistant Su-
perintendent, the latter the underground
of the Richmond) are to be re-
lied upon, it is certainly nearly exhausted,
as they swore that there were no important
ore bodies above the sixth level, and that
that part of the mine was mostly given up
to %tributers, and that no ore of any value
had ever been found below that level. We
may not give the exact words, but we GER
tainly state in general terms what they
swore to, which was corroborated, so we
are informed, by the President of the
company in Carson. 1t is quite possible
that the witnesses named may not have
stated the condition of things accurately
as was the case with reference to other
made by them at the same
time-for it is quite evident that the Chief
did not believe them. So far as
the SENTINEL is concerned, it is earnest in
the wish and hope that larger and more
valuable ore bodies may be found than
AaNC v bCSA oulo IA ehO
mine.
Is the announcement by the S~NNTINEL that
the Richmond mine is exhausted likely to at
tract outside capital to the camp and improve
the times, or the contrary
The SENTINEL believes IL IL true policy
to tell the truth, and if capital canno be
attracted to the camp by telling the
truth, il had better not be attracted by
publishing, knowingly, false reports and
statements. Too many Of these have al
ready emanated from this camp, and the
sESTiNxL will not Willingly and knowingly
disseminate them, So fer az the Richmond
Is concerned. we have only repeated the
sworn statements Of its Assistant Super
intendent and foreman, and the remarks
Of its President. AS to the falsity of these
that 10 a matter between those
them and their oonsciences.
Why should the fact that the Judgment of
the Supreme Court in favor of the Albion,
coupled with the telegraph published in the
article, be q pretty %effectual bar to
any further litigation here between the parties
to the same mining ground2
Ia this last statement published with intent
to influence the decisions that are likely to be
made during the progress of the cases re-
to be tried?
This question it appears to us is an
by the judgment and the telegraphic
correspondence published by us yesterday.
It is we'll known to our entire community
that all the litigation as to title is between
the same parties for the same ground, and
upon the same Tor worse) titles that were
litigated in the Rose suit, and decided by
that Judgment in the Supreme Court OF
our State; and that the cases now pending
are merely vexatious cases, carried on for
the sole object Of trying to embarrass and
the Albion Company, and prevent
them, il possible, from enjoying the use OF
their property by legal bubbles n tech
nicalities. So far as influencing the deci-
in these cases, we do not for a mo-
ment believe that anything we can say or
do will in any manner or way influence
Judge kives in deciding upon them. Nor
have we any such thought. Our only de-
sire is to lay before our readers fair state
ments of this litigation as we understand it.
Is it not probable that many very intricate
and doubtful questions may arise during the
of the three remaining cases?
If so, are not our Courts, after argument
upon a full aud careful examination of author.
tiles more likely to decide correctly than the
newspapers?
To the above we can simply answer, ss a
legal proposition, that when a title to a
piece Of property has been once litigated
and final judgment entered, it is not posi-
BILE that any other every intricate and
doubtful questions may arise during the
hearing Of remaining cases" between the
same parties for the same property, on
same or worse titles. all Of which belonged
to the defeated party at time OF trial. We
believe, and so does every one familiar
with the litigation, not a partisan, that the
in the Rose case used its best
titles, not its worst; and we further believe
that ''our Courts" will 'upon a full and
careful examination Of authorities" con-
cede, in our view, that the main facts and
titles have been litigated and passed upon.
What object has the SENTINEL in constantly
hammering away at the Richmond-Albion liti.
CATION? Is 1t from an inherent love of justice
and the Advancement of the interests Of the
district2 Hardly.
In answer to the above we have merely