Walker Lake bulletin. (Hawthorne, Nev.) 1883-1926, 1892-03-16
THE POoRMAN LOSES.
Defendants Lose Their Mine and
Must Pay One Dollar Dam

The trial of the case of the Indian
Queen VS.. the Poorman was begun in
the District Court last Monday week
and occupied the attention Of the
Court until last night, occupying nine
days in all.
Following are the names of the
jurers: F. E. Hill, John Smith, A. r..
George, Rebt Bergman, F. Glese, T..
j. Brodigan, J. L. Severance, James
sharkey, c. g. Fogg, j. A. Jackson, l..
l.. Leidy and j. G. Mcmillan.
The witnesses for the Queen were ::
l.. F. j. Wrinkle, w. S. Couch, John
Z. Ryan, John Murray, John Grady,
LOUIS Janln, B. Aquiliar, Chas. Shirley
and P. Manning.
The witnesses for the Poerman were
A. Garard (whe was under fire for a
day and a half, VIM. Witherell, Louis
Williams, Al. Merton, Richard Greer,
VIM. Shimmin, VIM. Charles and
Robert Somervllle.
The arguments were begun on TIes-
day morning, each side being limited
| TO three hours talk.
Mr.. Cracker opened the argument
and spoke one hour. He was followed
by Mr.. Bowler, who spoke for two
hours. Mr.. Reddy then presented the
Queen side IN two-and-a half hour
talk.
The Instructions of the Judge arc
very long, and we can only give them
in condensed form, as follows:
JUDGE RIsING's INSTRUCTIONS
There are two main issues Involved
in this controversy for you TO decide
in determining the respective rights of
the parties-first, whether the original
locator, Witherell, made the location
of two distinct veins, Nos. l and 3, and
if you should find that they are distinct
veins, then whether the vein now
claimed by plaintiff is No. or No. 3.
If you should conclude that the vein
now claimed by plaintiff was and is
actually vein No. 3, then the plaintiff,
under the law, could not be permitted
to follow the vein beyond the end lines
of No. 3 as located. If yeu should
conclude that the vein now claimed by
plaintiff was and is actually vein No.
|, then the plaintiff, under the law,
would have the right to follow il down
ward across the vertical side lines and
lying within planes formed by the
extension of the end lines.
If you should find that where
Witherell might have intended to To-
cate two veins, but in fact, there was
only one vein that was located, and
that is No. l, then you will proceed to
the next question, whether, the Nc. 1
voin is one aud the same as the Poor
man or not Upon this question you
will he guided and controlled by the
evidence in the case--the plaintiff con-
tending that 1t is enc aud the same,
the defendants claiming that it is "A
separate and distinct one from the
Queen vein.
1t is conceded that the Queen vein,
If No. 1, continues from the location
through the various works, into the
Cutter Wine, down the winZe 10 the
point called sump,' where they say
it departs into the ground, and that
the workings from that point across
the intervening distance to the place
called the Poorman apex" in Poor
man upraise, are constructed through
barren country rock, which clearly
separates the Queen vein in the Cutter
WINS from the Poorman vein.
The foregoing is the substance in a
nutshell of the instructions given the
jury with regard to the proper issues
in the case, but it was followed by a
number Of other instructions with re-
gard to the interest and credlbility of
witnesses and with regard 10 what con-
stitutes a valid location. and what is a
vein and what is a lode under the law.
After about one hours deliberation
the jury returned verdict for the
Queen Company, assessing damages
against the defendants in the sum OF
ST. Ths verdict was unanimous.
And thus ends a long, troublesome
and expensive controversy.
LYON COUNTY IteooS