Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 8.djvu/312

 298 FEDERAL REPORTER. �of, and adjoining, the Lime, and before locating it the discoverers sunk a shaft to tka depth of eO feet, and at. the bottom found a large body of mmeral. After the location of the Smuggler, its owners eoni- menced running inclines and drifts, and in ithem also de veloped a cohsiderable body of minerai. After, the diseoveiiy of the minerai in the Smuggler claim, the owners of the Lime run inclines from the Lime daim into and upon the Smuggler clsiim, and connected them with the Smuggler workings. Thereupon the Iron Silver Mining Com- pany, which previously h ad purchased: the Lime claim, ccmmenced their action against defendants, who had bec orne the owners of the Smuggler, to eject them from tha body of minerai they had discov- ered and developed within the Smuggler location, claiming that it was the Iode or vein of minerai which had ita apex within the Lime claim. Tbis'the Smuggler owners diaputed, claiming that there was no vein or Iode within the Lime ground; that whatever minerai was there was not in place, but had been removed to that point from some other locality; and that itwas found in a formation 80 broken and jumbled that there was neither foot nor hanging walls to it. It was upon this disputed question of faot that the trial was had, and the instructions of the court were directed to its elucidation, and were as follows. �G. G. Syines and Jonas Seeley, for plaintiff. , Markham, Pater son, Thomas e Campbell, and J. B. Belford, for defendants. �Halleti,D, J. . I presume, gentlemen, that you feel some relief that you are approaching the time when you will be relieved from the consideration of this case. You have given careful atteiition to the evidence produced,.and I presume that you are disposed to give it the consideration which the importauce ascribed to the case by the parties seems to demand. If we are to believe some of the witnesses who have testified here, the property is of very little value indeed. But the elaborate preparations that have been made for the trial of the case seem to contradict that statement. At least, the opinion of the parties must be that the claim ia of some value, and it seems to me that perhaps the value may be, (I do not state this as a matter that is of any importance in your consideration of the case,) but perhaps the value of it may be in the minds of the parties as re- lating to other territory which may lie to the east of it. Whoever may triumph here on the principles which have been reeognized in respect to these Iodes, it is possible that other contre versies may arise in respect to other territory lyitig to the east of both daims. And ��� �