Amador ledger., 1904-02-12
Kerr's Pharmacy, Jackson.
Decision of the Court.

On February Judge Rust rendered
his decision in the suit of w. Scoble
against L. j. Seavy and F, A. Orr, a
suit brought to quiet the title of plain
tiff to the Champion quartz claim in
Plymouth district. Seavy, as admins
traitor of the estate of John MINIS, dis
claimed any interest in the property
Defendant Orr, however, filed an ans
wer setting forth that plaintiff aban-
doned the mine by failing to perform
labor on the property during the years
1900 and 1901 amounting to 800, as the
law provides. That Orr located the
property Nov. 10, 1901. and had done
the necessary work each year there
after. The case was tried before the
court several weeks ago, number of
witnesses being examined on each side.
The case hinged on whether the plain
tiff and his grantors had performed
the annual assessment in the year 1900;
if SO the claim was not subject to re-
location. On this point the decision
says:
The testimony given by plaintiff him-
self on this point is in effect that plain
tiff and his son, w. H. Scoble, during
the month of November worked 10
days, and during that time cleaned out
the open cut, ran feet of drift, drilled
and blasted, working nine hours dav,
and that the value of this work was
$50. In January 1900 he sunk three or
four cuts and three or four prospect
holes on the claim for the purpose of
exposing the ledge, as parties were de-
sirous of bonding his claim. In that
year A. j. Estey and his son, Paul
Estey, worked there from 10 to II days
for plaintiff, and plaintiff paid them
$50, making total of $105, in addition
to work done in January above men,
toned
In the year 1901 plaintiff bonded the
property to DR.. Thomas Boyson, who
agreed to do the assessment work for
that year, and who cleaned out the
shaft, 60 to Is feet deep, retim bered it
| from collar to bottom, and ran cross
cut at the bottom II feet long, three to
four feet wide and six feet high, which
work was worth 1925. This work was
done in Dec, 1901.
Plaintiff also did work in 1902 drift
ing on tunnel, himself and Rupert
Timms doing the work, plain tiff's work
being valued at so, and that of
Timms at $45.
A. j. Estey and his son Paul both
testified corroborating plaintiff as to
the work in 1900 and the valuation
thereof, and both testified that instead
of being paid in cash the work went to
pay an undertaking bill due Scoble for
the burial of the mother of the witness,
A. j. Estey, amounting to balance
of $50.
Defendant Orr endeavored in the
cross-examination of these witnesses to
contradict them by showing that Estey
and his son only performed S25 worth
OF work that year, and that the bal
ance due for the funeral was $25 and
not $50, as testified to by Scoble, Estey
and his son, but a severe cross-exami-
nation failed to change their testimony.
The decision concludes, testing
the evidence by these rules: That the
burden OF proving a forfeiture rested
upon the defendant who claimed it;
and the further rule that forfeiture
cannot be established except by clear
and convincing proof of the failure of
the former owner to have the work
performed and the improvements made
to the amount required by law, it seems
clear that the defendant has failed to
prove this defense by preponderance
of the evidence. For the foregoing
reasoning it follows that plaintiff is en-
titled to decree quieting title against
defendants, and that as to defendant
John MINIS, deceased, this decree shall
be without costs.