The White Pine news. [volume] (Treasure City, Nev.) 1868-1906, 1903-11-05

location certificate WAS recorded hi,
slst 1899. She might easily have lesrnsa
| the exact date of the location ana n
name of the locator 10y SEARCHING r.
records. | do not find any evidence that
the Watsons In any way endeavored ~
conceal the facts as to the loeation ~
the Joanna or Mrs. Watsnn's clair,
10 sole ownership.
A quotation from the opinion of thu
| L. s. Supreme Court In johnston =
Standard Min. Co. SUPRA. will be -
sufficient answer To counsels contention
with reference TO the degree of kno,vl.
edge plaintiffs must have had before she
would be answerable for delay. Mr.
| Justice Brown. speaking for the CONF
in the last cited ease. said:
While there is no direct or posiff5.
testimony that plantff had KNOWLEDGE
Of what WAS taking place with respeet
20 the title or development of the pron.
cry. the circumstances were such as Ia
put him upon inquiry; and the law IL
gel settled that where the question nf
laches is in issue the plaintiff is charg.
cable with such knowledge as he might
have obtained upon inquiry. provided the
facts already known by him were such
| az to put upon a man of ordinary intel
| ligenee the duty of inquiry.
The duty of inquiry was all the more per
emptory, In this case, from the fact thar
the property itself was OF uncertain
character, and was liable. as is most
mining property TO suddenly develop an
enormous increase In value"
/ The plaintiff testified that lust before
the signing of the bond to LAWYER Mrs
4 Watson came to me and said she had
/ been told had consulted n lawyer about
my interest In the Joanna" said |
had not that I did not want 10 go 10
/ law She said. viii will do what Is
+ two years before the complaint herein
was filed. Whether or not Mrs Watson
told Mrs. Bonner VIII you do what is
right" or words To that effect is one
Of the disputed points OF the evidence
/ No other similar promise or representa-
| ton by Watson or his wife was testified
| 10. The Watsons offered Mrs Bonner
no share in the money paid by LAWYER
| for the bond on the Joanna" They
never gave her any OF the royalties
received from leases In no other
way did they ever admit that she
might have any claim To the property
Granting that Mrs. Watson made the
promise | do not consider that that Is
a sufficient excuse for a failure for 81
| long time 10 assert In the only pracu-
eal way the rights she claimed and
which she must, from all the circun-
stances. have known that the Watsons
denied. As was said by Judge Thayer
In Curtis v. Lakin SUPRA. where there
WIS only two years delay. the rule is
that one claiming an interest In prop
I eriy of that nature thinning property
must take steps To establish his title
( with all convenient speed If he has rea-
sonable grounds 10 believe that such
asserted interest will be denied b. those
f IN possession of the property who are
at the time engaged in developing IT,
+ In cases OF the latter kind, courts Of
/ equity will refuse relief II the complain
ant has failed to bring suit Tor com
paratiYely short period after the denial
Of his rights became known To him. I'M
| less a good excuse Is offered Tor such
delay; and they viii more readily hold
/ that the cause Of action Il barred by
laches II II appears that the failure To
sue WIS occasioned. in whole OF In part
+ by "a desire on the part Of the complain.
ant to ascertain how development work
In progress on the property would affect
/ its value
+ From the facts found and tho views
expressed IN This decision It necessarily
1 follows that the defendants William A.
/ Watson and Annie NJ. Watson. are en-
/ lifted Ia a Judgment IN their favor dis
missing the action and FOR their costs.
Let the Judgment be entered accord
/ ingly
GEO S. BROWN.
District Judge.