The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1892-04-10

tnen attacked the defendants theory, and
olssecied the mass OF evidence in favor of
IT, Mr.. Williams discussion of the case
was strong, forcible and lawyer-like. free
from passion and full of logic.
A brief recess was taken at the conclus
ION OF the arguments, and ct AS Judge
Zane commenced reading his
CHARGE TO THE JURY.
The most intense interest prevailed during
the reading, and the parties in interest,
with the witnesses, experts and spectators,
crowded to the front in order to catch
every word. The unanimous opinion was
that tue charge was a very able fair and
impartial one, and the defendants seemed
particularly pleased with it. The charge
In full was as follows:
Gentlemen of the Jury: This action is to re-
cover camages in consequence of a trespass by
me defendants upon q mineral vein described
IN III plaintiffs complaint as alleged.
ana the court charges you that vein or lode
WITHIN the meaning OF the act of Congress, is
nlnerellZeo and ore bearing rock in place, hay-
ing definite boundaries 1t may be in the form
OF assure in the earths crust in which the
minerals have been deposited, or in the form of.
contact vein lode; that is 10 say, when the
naturalization of metals occurs along the con-
tact between two fiereDt rock formations:
or II may be q bedded vein and the mineraliza-
ton may extend to the contact or such MN
etalizaiion may be wholly within one rock for
nation such naturalization may be narrow
at places and widen to a considerable extent at
olher places; It may, for a considerable dis
lance, be nearly or quite barren of precious
metals, and sun be continuous vein or lode.
THE LOCATOR or A MINING CLAIM
has the exclusive right of possession and eniov.
Inent OF all the surface included within the
INES Of his location, and of all veins, lodes and
ledges throughout their entire depth, the top or
apex OF which lies inside of such surface lines
extending down vertically, although such ven
lodes or Lodges may so far depart from the rer-
pendlcular IN their course downward as to ex-
tend outside The vertical side lines ofsuch sur
face location.
The apex of a vein is that portion of it which
outcrops or comes nearest to the surface. The
strike OF VEN IS Its longitudinal course. The
up OF vein is the angle at which it penetrates
the earth on its downward course.
One who has made valid location
uFoN THE APEX OF VEIN
becomes the owner of that portion of 1t which
on It's strike is included within the surface
limits or bounda les of his location as laid upon
the surface throughout the entire depth of that
portion OF It. although such vein in its down
Ward course may so far depart from perpen-
dlcuIar plane as 10 extend beyond the side lines
OF Inc surface location. The owner of the apex
OF Inc vein is entitled to and is presumed to be
IN possession Of all that portion of Il throughout
us entire depth. The course and strike of which
at the apex is included in the surface boundar-
les of his location.
In making mining claim location it ia not
necessary tnat the locator should lay his claim
with the true strike of the vein. If he locates
an outcrop where il shows on the surface he
VIII be entitled to follow il on its inclinat on
into the ground, although in making that inci-
nation the vein does not run on the true dip but
runs ohllquely with the true dip the right of
Such locator being limited only by the end
lines OF his claim, extended down vertically
Proof OF title to land is proof OF possession
Thereon, unless some other is shown to be actu-
allyln the control aud occupancy of the land
And the court further charges that ii Won he.
lleVe from preponderance of the evidence that
the plaintiffs at the date mentioned in their
complaint. were il the possession of the North
land claim, and that the defendants without
their consent entered upon such possession and
extracted ard carried away ores from vein
within Inc lines OF such claim extended down
wards vertically that prima facie right of re-
coVery IS thereby shown for the plaintiff and
that The burden of proving that defendants had
4 right 10 enter and take such ores is upon
them
A lease from the owners of the NortbIand
ana Nevada claims to the plaintiffs
WOULD NOT GIVE THEM A RIGHT
to follow any vein not apexing therein beyond
the vertical lines of such claims
II you believe from a preponderauce of the
evidence that the ore extracted by the defend
ants within the vertical lines of the Northlaud
claim was mined from vein the apex of which
is contained within some mining claim owned
by the defendants or any other of them, or by
some person or persons who had authorized the
defendants TO extract the same then Won shonId
lind for the defendants.
The fact tina the apex OF that part OF the vein
Within the vertical lines of the Northland claim
and IN dispute. was within some mining claim
or claims owned by persons with whom the de-
PENDANTS. or any OF them have not proven any
connection by lease or otherwise, is no defense
to this action.
Though you may believe from preponder-
ance of the evidence that the defendants com
mltted the trespasses complained of. ana that
the apex OF he vein was in claim owned bv
persons from which the cefendants HAD no
Ilsnt ana were not connect d. vet If you fur
Their believe from the evidence that such own
ers afterwards released to the defendants all
damages from such tresspasses.
YOU CANNOT FIND FOR THE PLAINTIFFS
If you find from preponderance of the evil
dence that that part OF the vein in dispute has
its apex in the Fairview mining claim then Won
should fed the issues for the defendants; but
if you do not so ind them then Won shall fnS
for the plaintiffs if you further find that The de
lenQantS look the ore from that part of the
vein within the vertical lines of the Northlsnd
claim within the times mentioned in plaintiffs
complaint as therein alleged.
IL you find from a preponderance of the evi
dence that the defendants committed the tres
passes as alleged by the plaintiffs and that the
damages IN consequence thereof have not bepn
released TO the defendants by any person or
persons having the right to do so then Won
should assess plaintiffs damages TO the amount
OF the market value OF the ores taken less fhe
necessary cost of extracting them and niacin9
them upon the market.
. he court further charges YOU that Won AFRO
the sole judges of the cred bility of tn wit,
ntsseS. and IN so doing you have the right 10
take into consider ration their department IInon
the witness stand, their opportunities and ca
pacitles
TO UNDERSTAND AND REMEMBER
the statements they made the interest or the
absence OF II in the result of the suit their an
parent frankness and candor or the lacI, of +
The fact that their statements mav be reason
able or unreasonab e in the light of evidence
ana any TACT IN evidence which in your iudg-
ment Affects their credibility.
It is also your sole duty 10 weigh the evi
dence and in doing 1t you should consider il all
together aud not give undue weipht 10 the tes-
umony Of any witness or TO any fact; YOU should
cCns.d DER the evidence fairly and ir1partiallv
If you find the issues for the plaiutifs Won
will in your verdict state the amount of dam
ages found.
# you find the issues for the defendants Won
will so state.
AT THE CONCLUSION
Of the reading, Arthur and Theopholis Par
sons were sworn III as bailiffs, and thew
took the jurors 10 dinner, while the court
announced an adjournment until 7:3O. AS
the jurors wanted copy of the CHARGE
they did not commence their deliberations
until after pm, when type written
copy was furnished them. Following are
the twelve good men and true:
Carol S. Hardy, John Lees, Seward
Davis, Thomas Pells, James b. Cress
t1enry HllEnt John Il. Calllster, Hans /
Peterson, William Maybe, w. +. Cromer
j. j. O'Rielly and George Buckle.
IN THE JURY ROOM.
II was the general opinion that there
would be no hung jury'' this time. and /
the result proved that this opinion was /
correct. The jurors went to work as soon /
as they obtained the charge, and it is un- /
derstood that the first ballot stood nine for |
the defendants and three for the plaintiffs, |
The question as to whether or not thew !
could limit the right of the plaintiffs 10 |
recover for the ore extracted from the tri |