The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1896-03-20
DECIDED In A HURRY
The Jury Quickly Settles the Old
Glory Controversy.
NOTHING FOR PLAINTIFF
Des Rivleres and Hamelln VIII
Now Eegln Work on the Mine
and I AXE Out Rich Ore
Unmolested.
NOTHING

The Old Glory mining case of Robert
c. Burton against Louis Des Rivieres
and Joseph Hamelin was concluded
yesterday and the jury deliberated only
about half an hour before a unanimous
verdict in favor of the defendants was
arrived at. When the trial was re-
sumed yesterday morning Mr.. Forbis
announced the close of their case and
no rebuttal testimony was introduced.
The court asked how much time for
argument was wanted and an attorney
for the defendant said they would like
to have about two hours. MIR. Forbis
said his side did not want that much.
but he had no objection to the other
side having two hours.
The case went to the jury shortly
after O'Clock and half an hour later
the verdict. which read as follows, was
returned: I'VE, the jury, find for the
defendants and that the title and right
to the possession of the ground in con-
troversy in this action is in the said
defendants"
The special findings for the defend
ants are as follows: Is the Reindeer
lode claim as claimed by the plaintiff
located on the Copper Hill range or on
the Soap gulch divide? Answer-On
the Soap gulch divide
Did the plaintiff do or cause to be
done 800 worth of work on the Rein
deer lode location as claimed by him.
In or during the year 1894? Answer
No.
Is there such a description Of the
plaintiffs Reindeer location in the re-
corded notice given in evidence here
in, by reference to some natural object
or permanent monument, as will iden-
tify the claim? Answer-No.
Has the plaintiff moved or attempted
to shift the Reindeer location claimed
by him from the place where he origin
ally located IL? Answer-Yes.
The court had instructed the jury
that the plaintiff before he could re-
cover under his claim of a prior loca-
ton would have to prove by a prepon-
derance Of the evidence that he per-
fected a valid location of the premises
and has maintained his right thereto
by complying with the laws respecting
mining claims and that on the 18th day
of May 1S9. he made a discovery of a
well-defned vein of mineral with at
least one wall within the limits OF the
ground located: that he worked the ex-
terror boundaries of the claim located
distinctly on the ground so that they
could be readily traced; that in the
written notice of location afterwards
filed, the claim was so described with
reference to natural objects and per-
manent monuments that II could be
identified; that the plaintiff during the
year 1894 performed for the benefit OF
or placed on the claim 800 worth OF
work or improvements. If the plaintiff
had failed in any OF these respects he
could not recover. IL making no differ
ence whether the defendants had any
| title to the ground or not. The instruc-
lions seem to have been very fair and
| impartial.
On request of the plaintiffs attorneys
the jury was polled and was found
unanimous on the general verdict and
on each and every one of the special
findings. The plaintiff was granted a
stay until 10 o'clock this morning. The
jury that tried the case was composed
of Alfred Tippet. William Stolte. J. J.
York, John l.. Carroll, viii l.. Clark.
Alfred Cox, Frank Ambrose, Charles
Pierce, r. NJ. Davidson, Howard Ad-
ans. r. ID. McLaggin and Louis
Baumler.
II is probable that Des Rivieres and
Hamelin will Immediately upon the
dissolution of the injunction resume
operations on the mine, which is said
to be probably the richest gold prop
erty in the state.