Arizona republican., 1898-04-14
A PECULIAR DECISION.

A PECULIAR DECISION.
 A suit involving an important ques- tion of mining law was tried recently at Virginia City before Judge Parker. The title of the action was w. H. San ders ct al vs. D. H. Noble ct al. The plaintiffs claimed the ground in con- troversy under a discovery and loca- tion called the "Neversweat' lode made on August ', 1897. The posted notice was in the usual form, but de- scribed the course of the lode as "northerly and southerly," while the proof showed that the true direction of the line they intended to describe was nearly northwest and southeast.
 After posting the notice upon the Neversweat, the plaintiffs being under contract to do some work in Roches- ter, left their claim temporarily, but returned in about six weeks. During their absence, however, the defen-. dants made discovery in the vicinity of the Neversweat location. Desiring to make a location themselves. they ran a line due north from the Never sweat discovery to point opposite the ground they wished to locate, then offset 300 feet to fix the point where the Neversweat side line would run, and within fifty feet of that point established the end line of their own claim which they called the Yukon.
 When the plaintiffs returned to their claim, they found the develop ment work upon the Yukon fully per formed, the corner post set, and the defendants gone. The plaintiffs, how ever, before the expiration of ninety days after the posting of their notice, sunk their shaft to depth of ten feet, established their corners, en- closing the ground they had originally intended to locate and recorded their declaratory statement. The Never sweat as thus located extended nearly northwest and southeast and included the discovery of the Yukon. Subse- quently the locators of the Neversweat brought the above action to eject from the ground in controversy the Yukon claimants.
 MT. Howell, one of the plaintiffs counsel, maintained that location mo- tices should be literally construed and that as the statute only requires the general course of the lode as near as may be" to be given in the posted notice, the term 'tnortherly' would protect a location made northwesterly, and that the defendants having enter ed upon doubtful territory had done so at their peril. MT. Shropshire, in behalf of the defendants, contended that the terms "northerly and south erly" should be strictly construed, and that the defendants had the right to lay out plaintiffs claim on a north and south 1ine and to make their own To- cation on territory that was left.
 The court took the latter view of the law and held that where other rights have intervened and other claims have been initiated, locator is bound strictly by his location mo- tice. If he makes a mistake in the direction of his claim, the prejudice lies at his own door. If necessary he must employ surveyor to run his lines, so as not to infringe upon oth- CTS rights, and in this case the court held that the locators of the Never sweat in finally stalking their claim as they did, infringed upon the rights of the Yukon claimants.
 The effect of this decision is to make it necessary for the locator to be ab- solutely sure of his bearings when To- eating his claim, or else to set his cor ner posts at the time of posting his notice. If he takes ninety days after posting his notice to mark his cor ners, he does so at the risk of some intervening claimant taking advantage of some defect in his posted notice. This case vii be appealed to the su- preme court-Western Mining World.