The Goldfield news and weekly tribune. [volume] (Goldfield, Nev.) 1911-1947, 1918-03-02
TOWN LOT OWNERS
WILL COMBAT
DECISION
GOLDFIELD PROPERTY OWNERS
TO CONTEST SAMUEL
FOX TITLE

court against Samuel COX of Tono-
pah, who on appeal to the commits
sioner of the general land office at
Washington, recently vas decreed
the owner of valuable lots in the
heart of the Goldfield business dis
trict.
The plaintiffs in the case are Ma
define Marine, Thomas ]. Lee,
Arthur L. Jett, Effie l.. Jet, John
v Burge. E. A. Schmidt, Charles
Phillips, William Myers, H. F.
Rimpler and May Evans and it is
said these persons are but 10 Of
over 20 interested in the action.
AS what Is known as the Fox
case was started over 10 years ago,
many of the facts in the case have
become clouded and the present ac-
ton serves to still further confuse
the case in the minds of persons
who have not followed it closely in
recent years.
The suit filed by Thompson and
Thompson involves territory from
Elliott street to and across Miner
street, including the Grimshaw ho-
tel and Downer brothers assay
Office. In width the claim includes
from and including the east side of
Columbia street west to First street.
Early in 1903 settlers went to
this ground and erected tents. On
May 2S, 1903, James Ennis, Samuel
Fox, T. l.. eddie and c. Schmidt
located the ground a lode mining
claim and named 1t The Ramsey
Extension claim.
On August 26. 1903, A. D..
Myers, T. D. Murphy, Harry Ram
sey and w. D. Beauchamp located
over the same ground what they
called the Idols Eye lode claim.
Soon after this the second locators,
with H. c. Hall and R. C.. Cook,
formed the Goldfield Townsite COM
pany and plotted the claim into
town lots, almost all of which ere
sold for good prices. They gave to
purchasers a contract for a deed to
be delivered when they received a
patent from the government.
In the latter part of 1906 or the
early part of 1907, Fox. Ennis, Cd
die and Schmidt commenced suit in
the district court to recover from
Myers, Murphy, Ramsey and Beau
champ the ground covered by the
Ramsey Extension claim.
About eve years later and after
the residents on the land had COM
pletely forgotten the suit, a judg-
ment was entered in favor of Sam
uel Fox and the other plaintiffs and
against the defendants, the owners
of the Idols Eye claim. This de-
cree was entered Jan. 81, 1913.
Early in. 1909 residents of Gold
field had made application to the
government for a townsite, which
included the ground covered by the
Ramsey Extension claim and on
Nov. IS, 1909, the government is
sued a patent to Theron Stevens,
trustee for the Goldfield townsite.
Deeds were made and delivered by
Stevens to the occupants of the
land.
On Nov. 16, 1915, Fox, who in
the meantime had acquired the in
terests of all the other locators of
the Ramsey Extension claim, made
applicatio2 for a patent. He made
his final proof and payment for the
claim, but the land office withheld
his final receipt until the town lot
owners could be heard.
At this point a contest was filed
and testimony taken which was sub
mitted to the register of the lani
office and also the receiver of the
land office at Carson.
The register decided against Fox
and in favor of the lot and
the receiver in favor OF Fox and
against the lot owners
Fox then appealed to the COM
missioner of the general land office
at Washington and de decided adj
versely to the lot owners.
Thompson and Thompson, attor-
neys for the plaintiffs in the present
action, have now made application
to the commissioner of the general
land Office for permission to re-
open the. case and submit testimony
which they claim was omitted at
the previous hearing. 1t IS claim
ed the important evidence in thu
case was the decree rendered in
favor of Fox and against Myers
ct al.