Arizona silver belt., 1904-03-03
LAKE SUPERIOR AND ARIZONA
Suit Filed by F. 5. Pheby for an Interest in Its Mining GrOund


 Tuesday there was fled in the dis
 trlct court, at Florence, says the
 Blade, suit in which Fred $. Pheoy
 is plaintilf and George Lobb and bis
 success, ors, the Lake Superior and
 Arizona Copper company, are made defendants. The action is brought to
 recover an undivided one-fourth in
 terest in the Golden Eagle mine, and
 an undivided one-half interest in the
 Golden Eagle Extension mine. Both
 of said mines are located on Queen
 creek, at Superior, and are the prop
 critics now undergoing development
 by the company above named. The
 complaint does not claim record title
 In the plaintiff but sets up that in
 January, 1898, George Lobb promised,
 as agent for Fred s. Pheby, to locate | the old Gem mine in the name of
 bimself and one Woolf, with the ex-
 press understanding and agreement that the said George Lobb was to hold
 in trust for the said Fred Pheby an undivided one-fourth interest in said claim, aud that in compliance with said promise and agreement did locate said old Gem claim in the name of himself and WOolf, and recorded it as the Golden Eagle mining claim. That two years thereafter the said George Lobb did locate in his own name the Golden Eagle Extension mining claim, with an express prior agreement that he would hold in trust for the said Fred s. Pheby an undivided one. half interest in said Golden Eagle Exten- sion mining claim. The complaint is filed by Thomas B. Pheby and J E. O'Connor as attorneys for plaintiff. The Blade is not advised as to the merits of this controversy, but under. stands that the plaintiff relies op doc umentary evidence outside of the of. tcial records for proof of his title.
 The Blade of February 2 publishes the following in regard to the suit
 Geo Lobb was down from Superior Saturday, and in discussing the Pheby suit against himself and the Superior company with the editor of the Blade, shed new light upon the merits of the controversy. MT. Lobb stated that he did hold an undivided one e-quarter in- terest in the Golden Eagle in trust for Fred s. Pheby, as charged in the com plaint, but that he was authorized by the plaintiff to handle said interest and sell it along with his own interest for the best figure and upon the best terms he could obtain. Or, in other words, to exercise bis own judgment in disposing of it. This, Mir. Lobb says, he did, and when the sale was completed sent Mir Pheby check for one fourth of the purchase price. Sub sequently Mir. Pheby sent the check back to MT. Lobb, stating he would not accept if, as he did not consider the amount for which the claim was sold sufficient. After receiving this statement from Mir Lobb, we discussed it with Attorney Thos. B. Pheby and he admitted the statement was correct In view of this state of facts, the con troverSy, 1t seems to us, is narrowed down to Mir. LObb and MT. Pheby and can in no way affect the title of the company. They purchased from the owner of record, and there was noth- ing of record to show that the owner held any part of the property in trust for another person, hence they were innocent purchasers. Aside from this, it seems to be admitted that if trust existed MT LObb was authorized to handle and dispose of the interest held in trust, hence was qualified to pass legal title thereto. MT. Seboth'S depo- sition in this case is racy reading and will probably not be placed in evidence by the plaintiff when the case is called for tLial.