Arizona weekly journal-miner., 1898-04-27

location of October 18th, 1883, if properly made would have priority over the Equator" location made January lst, 1884. If, however, the
 annual assessment work had not
 been done in 1881, on Ferguson's
 Nellie the ground would have
 been open to relocation January
 2nd, 1882, when Kell made his loca-
 ton. and If the annual expenditure
 for 1883, had not been made there
 on, or If the oweeTs thereof had not
 resumed work before the expiration
 of the year 1888, the ground would
 have been open to location on Jan
 uary lst, 1884, when the Jordans
 made a location of the Equator" claim; and it would then become
 material as to whether the owner of
 Kells Nellie" had, in fact, resumed
 work upon that claim before inc eX-
 piration of the year 1883, and pur-
 sued it 10 a final completion, or to
 the extent of one hundred dollars l (Sl0000) required by the Statute. The jury solved the question in l favor of appeliees and ID favor of the Copper Chief ciaim as follows:
 "We, the jury find the issues herein ! joined for the defendants; aud we further find that they have estab-
 lished a right and t.tie to and are entitled 10 possession and occupan-
 cy of he premises ia controversy. by
 reason Of full compliance with the
 acts oi Congress and the laws of
 the Territory of Ar,zona relating
 thereto.
 This verdict is in harmony with
 the instruction given the jury by
 the court at the request If appel
 lants, which .s as follows, tO-Wit:
 "lf you find that neither the s1iG "Nellie" location of December 10th, 1879, nor the said location of Feb ] ruary 26;b, 1880, was a good aud 1 valid location, then you are in structed that the ground covered by | such attempted locations was open ! to location and entry on January 2nd, lSS2, and that the same was subject to bs relocated by any ci,i- of the United States. And If you further find that on said 2nd day of January, 1882, one G. V. Keil did make a valid location of said ground or any part thereof, which rmbr ced the ground in dispute in this sec tion, then you are further instructed that the attempted location on the same ground by the defendant Fer guson, In 1883, as the Copper Chief location, was void"
 ''So then if you find that the Nellie" location of 1873 or of Feb ruary 26th, 1880, was valid. but that the same became forfeited for the non performance Of annual work for ( he years 1880 and 1881; and YOU s further find that the Kell location | 1f the Nellie" in 1882 was valid | hen and in that event also you will { ind that the Copper Chief loca- | ion ef the Defendant Ferguson was | 'oid, so far as the ground in dispute II this section is concerned, for the { eason that if the Kell location Of \ he Nellie" in 1882 was valid, then a he ground within the limits of thai a ncation was not subject to location I T appropriation by another until h fter the expiration of the year n SSS." Ii
 The jury having resolved in favor c f appellees and the Copper c Thief" settles the rights to the dis n 'uted ground under the law, ana the lC judgment rendered thereon must iC tand, unless there can be shown 1! Ome error of the court in directing u he issues or the introduction or re- jl sction of evidence, or the instruc- ions 10 the jury. It is not pretend q that there is not suffi iant evi- ence to support the verdict of tue ~ ., lry, therefore, nothing is before us ', } decide but the correctness of the V V things of the court during the trial ,I' I I the cause. and of the instructions v iven to the jury or asked or re- o ised. v