Santa Fe new Mexican. [volume] (Santa Fe, N.M.) 1898-1951, 1899-12-14
Late Mining Decisions.

A, bill in equity will not lie to restrain
the mining and removing of coal from
complainant's premises where there is
no werner Of irreparable injury ana
insolvency Of the one taking it, the law
furnishing an adequate remedy in an
action of 'trespass.-Rice VS.. Looney (Sl
Illinois Appellate Court Report, 53O'
Appellate Court OF Illinois.
One who leases mining property from
a corporation with full knowledge OF a
prior mortgage or same, which Is con-
tested by the corporation, takes subject
to all rights of the mortgagee; ana
where the validity of the mortgage is
sustained he is not entitled to claim the
proceeds of the mines while operated by
a receiver appointed in the foreclosure
suit, as against the MORTGAGE, on the
ground that he expended money to rem
der them productive.-G. V. B. Mining
Company VS.. First National Bank 90
Federal Reporter, 35), United States
Circuit Court of Appeals.
Certain parties and one l.. entered in
to a partnership for the purpose OF To-
eating, developing and operating mines
While prospecting under the agreement
L. located two mining claims in his W
name, contrary to the agreement, and
on July q, 1894, conveyed a part interest
to third persons, and on March =, 1896,
the entire interests in the claims was
transferred to a corporation, organized
for that purpose, in exchange for stock
The compliments were first advised OF
the sale of part interest in the claims in
1895, but never communicated with l.
for the purpose of obtaining an ac-
counting or ascertaining his intentions
On November 10, 1897, about II veal
| after they were informed of the convey
ance Ito the corporation, and W years
| after the first conveyance, and after tnt
claims had increased in value to al
amount exceeding 5000, 900, and expend
lures had been made in developing
the corporation, asking for a dissolu
| ton of-the partnership and an account
ing, and that the corporation be decree'
a trustee for the benefit of the com
claimants. The court held that they ha'
been guilty of laches, barring the RICH
of action. One claiming an interest il
mining property that is subject to grea
and sudden fluctuations in value, or tn
value of which is uncertain, cannot re
main silent and inactive. awaiting 10
velopments, while those in possessio
are expanding money in it's develop
ment, and a court of equity will deli
him relief, where he has failed to brin
suit within a comparatively short pc
riod.
Partners bring suit to compel a &C
partner to account for the proceeds {
partnership mining property transfer
red to a corporation in exchange fc
stock, and to compel the corporation
transfer to them the stock, where
does not appear that the corporatio
had knowledge of their claim, and tn
' stock may nave passed into the hand
of Innocent purchasers, must procee
with reasonable diligence, and whel
they have waited a year before con
mencing suit relief will be denied. Sue
delay Is not excused by a claim ths
the partnership agreement had bee
misplaced and was not found uni
shortly before the suit was begnn.-Cu
tbs vs.. Larkin Goa Federal reporter, PSI
Hunted States Circuit Court of Appeal