The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1895-11-10

main question was as to the time which
could be reasonably allowed to locator in
which to perfect his claim by placing mon
uments or stakes on its corners for the
proper indication of it's boundaries.
1t seems that the original locator, Patrick
n. ,Newbill, placed his notice on spur of
ledge and simply stated in it that he
claimed 1900 feet in length and 800 in
width on each side from the center of the
lode. His notice he posted in March, 1881,
and his claim he called the "Red Jacket"
Less than two weeks later location of
another claim, which they called the
Mammoth, was made by Thomas
Warden and G. w. wager, and this claim
overlapped, III fact embraced the greater
portion of NewbilPs claim 1t crossed it
at slight angle. Doe subsequently pur-
chased the Mammoth" and the Waterloo
company bought the Red Jacket"
Warden and wager, when they posted
their notice, set up seven stakes as monu-
ments to define their boundaries. Suit
was brought by the "Red Jacket" owners
in the San Bernardino court to determine
the question OF priority, and il resulted in
judgment in their favor. However, an
appeal was taken and the State Supreme
Court reversed this judgment of the Su-
perior Court.
The Supreme Court held that merely
posting notice upon quartz ledge, such
as Newbill had done, is not a valid loca-
ton OF a mining claim; that the claim
must be marked by visible monuments or
other indications by which the boundaries
can be readily traced, and that New bill had
not done that. The case was accordingly
sent back to the lower court for new trial.
Pending the disposition of this case the
owners of the Red Jacket applied for
patent from the United States to all their
original claim. Under the Federal law
this necess itated the bringing of a new
Ntr+ IoM No, ii, \
this was done the Waterloo Company had
1T removed to the Federal court because
the parties lltigant were citizens of differ
ent States.
United States Judge Ross heard the new
case and decided that Newbilps notice was
sufficient to inform any one coming on the
claim he had already located it, and that
should they attempt to locate upon any
portion of it they would be trespassers.
He held that the original locator is en-
Titled to reasonable period of time in
which to complete his location by putting
up the necessary monuments, and specified
twenty days as such reasonable time. He
therefore gave Judgment in favor of the
"Red Jacket
Doe appealed, and the appellate court
has affirmed Judge Ross position. Judge
Knowles in his opinion takes occasion to
say that the same facts and argument were
presented to the Federal appellate court
as were to the State Supreme Court, but
that it cannot agree with the State Su-
preme Court.
A. Fl. Ricketts, was attorney for the
Waterloo Company from the beginning of
the patent proceedings, and Reddy, Camp
bell & Nelson represented the other side,
succeeding the late Judge Messick. The
popularity of the case from legal point
of view is that two appellate tribunals,
acting on two separate proceedings involv-
ing the very same questions, should come
to directly contrary conclusions. By the
decision of the United States Circuit Court
of Appeals, the locator is allowed reason
able time in which to perfect his location.
utterly disregarded by the State Supreme
Court.