Morning appeal. [volume] (Carson City, Nev.) 1877-1906, 1903-10-04

!. re~o2 0eos tyAAoNDeV '-E~rE f'1l.7 %
irv- de,tA,s tie ,isssn M eRex q yn'c9i
L. inside such surface, 49, Sn = 1.,.sS
vertically, a1th.,
Ieins, Iodes or hedges may 50 lay nv
IAft t'ff0m q sperpendicular In their
,eurAe downward asc to. extend outside
he. vertical side lines .of said SURFACE
ocAtioh. But their right to the ,posses
lion of such outside parts 81 sucn
veins, lodes or lodges shall b enudneti
q such portions thereof ~ We between
vertical, planes drawn doYp4fd as
Ib6ve described through the end lines
n their location so Continued ID their
MN direction that such planes, will
ntersect such exterior parts Of such
veins, or lodges" 60. 80
Respondent contended that the Gen.
ersf' Thomas No 8 Vein as 1t enters Il
me Grief OF the Hill ground runs cross.
wise to the General Thomas No. 2
!ocation within the planes drawn
The relative position Of the Claims
and the strike 81 the General Thomas
No. 3 as eontended for by respondent
will be understood by reference to
the diagram. @.--.ta's =
It was held the Flagstaff case
COS o. s. 4O3) that under these pro-
visions the location of a mining claim |
should be made lengthwise in the |
course of the vein 1T was not the in |
tent of the law" said the court, &c to
allow a person to make his location |
crosswise of a vein so that the side
lines shall cross it, and thereby give
him the right to follow the strike Of
the vein inside of his side lines. That
\ ~ ~
to be established by the law"
II he does locate his claim in that
way his right must be subordinated
to the right of those who have pro-
perty located on the lode Their right
lines cannot be interfered with by him.
His right to the lode only extends to
| so much of the lode as his claim cross.
ed. If he has located cross-wise of the
lode and his claim is only one hun
dred feet wide, that one hundred feet
is all he has a right to. This we con-
slider to be the law as to locations on
lodes or veins"
! Applying these principles, the jury
were in effect told .4at the easterly
side lines of the General Thomas No.
i 3 claim was in fact, its end line, and
that appellant could not follow the
strike of the ledge beyond that line.
! The subject of the instruction was
the ownership of the miner on the vein
within his side lines. and could not
have been mistaken as appellant sug-
gests, to the method by which work
could be prosecuted within the limits
of the claim, either by upraising o.
drifting.
i Respondents instruction No. was
as follows:
4 "8. II you find from the evidence
, that the defendant entered upon q
ledge having its apex within the ex
, terror bounaries of plaintiffs location
, and extracted ore therefrom between
, planes drawn vertically downward
through the end lines of said location
= the right of the plaintiff to recover
!. damages for such acts would not be
a affected by proof merely that the place
from which such ore was extracted
!. could be reached by going continuousl,
!, through ledge matter from a ledgl
= having its apex within the exterior
!. boundaries of prior location belone
4 tng to the defendant. In order tina
:. such proof should avail the defend
liant, it must further appear that sucl
passage from the apex of defendant
q ledge is made continuously downar
on the dip of that ledge; and II an
!, portion of such passage must necesss
" rily be made either upwart Or Ia
.. orally along the strike, then the plair
!. tins right to recover Il not affected.
- Appellants evidence was to the e
= feet that at 4 point called "Crowfoot
* on the apex Of the First Easterly E.
=, tension of the Northern Belle, a pa
! sage could be made in in ore to the Is:
:. level and from thence in ore to the poll
IN from which the ore was taken It W.
- argued that these facts showed b,
-. one ledge.
- Respondents evidence was that Il
nf Northern Belle and General Thorn;
J. NO. were separate lodges, but thl
they united somewhere below the IL
!. and above the 18th level.
8. Assuming that the lodges had
=, united, the fact that one ledge could
-, reached in ore or ledge matter fro
y, the other below the point of uni,
~ does not prove they are one led
~; uo above that point.
.as Respondents instruction No. "
80 upon the subject of the measure
Oh damages. The testimony of the sec
~ tary of defendant and appellant she
n~~ w tuot tuO uCt QIO4sS N1IuOU0Ll0R
~ $50 900 has been paid. in fdivideu
M" to its stockholders, and the testimo
'I ~ the superintendent showed Il
- 1880 of the ore extracted WAS tai
en- from respondents ground. The tel
mony Of these officers was entir
-: undisputed. AS the verdict was
w $4,000 and under the most favora
les, rule respondent was entitled to
pex cover ssa mn orra,ier+ could 80 :.
ion heen rreinGiced hv the irstr,, ~. -
anu Appellant requested the court to
oy struct the jury as follows:
auu mo. 3. You are instructed that
On Holmes Mining Company, the defe
, III, ant in this action, is and was at
na. before the LIST day Of May, 1884,
~. time Of the alleged trespass, the owl
With no.sas.ior - the No.tha.s. ~
lnas claim, the First Easterly Extension
M the Northern Belle claim and the {