OCR Text |
Show A STUBBORN CONTEST For the Possession of the Sunrise Lode in La Plata. IS IT MINERAL LAND OR NOT? The Mining Men of the District Arrayed Against the Central Pacific Railroad Expert Testimony Testi-mony Beeau Before the Land Oftice in This City. The contest over the application for mineral min-eral patents for the Sunrise lode claim, lot Xo. S8, Paradise mining district, has begun in earnest before the United States land office of this city. The consolidated Moun- i tain Bov and Inrette lode, in the same dis- trict, also are involved. The property ia located in the La Plata district in Cache county. The cause represents upon one side the mining men of fhe district, and upon the other the greatest octopus of modem times, the Central Pacific Railroad company. GROUND OF ACTION. ' On January 14 of the present year Fred W. Thaekweli, Jhn T. Rich, John T. Rich, W. II. Booth, Jr., Willis H. Booth, sr., and Ada Collett filed application for mineral patents for the Sunrise lode mining claim, Paradise minins district. On the same date William M. Curtis, George B. Norman, Joseph M. Cohen, M. C. Harrington and Fred W. Thackwell filed, application ap-plication for mineral patents for the Consolidated Consol-idated Mountain Boy and Lorette. These mining claims are situated upon section 11, township 8, north range 2 east, which is within the boundaries of the grant to the Central Pacific Railroad company. The matter was laid before the general land office in Washington, which returned the following instructions: Should the mineral claimants, however, then preaaat to vou bis petition under oath and duly corruDorated alleging that the land embraced within his mineral application is valuable mineral land and more valuable for mineral tnan atrricul-tnral atrricul-tnral purposes, you will forward the petition to this olUce. The mineral claimants were duly notified according to the letter of instruction aad on the 11th of March they filed au affidavit alleging al-leging the mineral character not only of the ground in dispute but of the intersection. Some sixty odd witnesses were brought forward to corroborate the affidavit of the claimants. A hearing was asked to establish the character of the ground. The matter again was laid before be-fore the general land office, which directed that the local land otlice cause a bearing "to determine the character, mineral or non-mineral, non-mineral, of each smallest legal subdivision I in said section." The case was set for hearing on June 8, but was continued from time to time until yesterday when it was actively began. THE EVIDEXCB. The case was begun with Robert Garlinski on the stand. For t'ae Central Pacific Railroad Rail-road company Attorney Bird objected to the ruling by the register and receiver upon the taxation of costs for the reason that the land bos been granted to the company and that the applicants now for patents to mineral min-eral claims are under the rule granted a preference right of entry. Mr. Marsh for the claimants opposed the position taken by the attorney for the railway rail-way company and moved that the register and receiver be sustained in their position taken as regards to costs. The register and receiver overruled the objection and Attorney Bird promptly filed an objection, and gave notice that if the Central Pacific was compelled to pay any money for the taking of testimony in this case it would be under protest. Mil. BIRD OBJECTS. The Central Pacific people registered an objection to the hearing of the case, setting up that the land subject to inquiry was granted to the Central Pacific Railway company com-pany by an act of congress, passed July 1, 1M'2, and tbe act subsequent thereto. Mr. Hirii rintd th&t it war & mieat.inn erf 1w and set up that it was a question of fact and should be decided toy register and receiver. Mr. Bird insisted upon a ruling. The register and receiver held that no ruling was necessary, as the hearing had been ordered by the general land office and there was now nothing left but to go ahead and hear the case, f Mr. Bird took an exception. Mr. Bird objected to everything possible, and in each case when a ruling was made entered an exception. , THE CASE BEGINS. Robert Garlinski was the first witness. He testified that as a United States deputy mineral surveyor he had surveyed for patent mineral claims in section II, township 8 i. .1 . a .t il uuriu, radge it casi, iu xoyi. A map of the Sunrise, Mountain Boy and Lorette claims was introduced into the hearing. hear-ing. Mr. Bird You established a United States mineral monument upon section 11, did you not? The WiOfst I aid; No. 2; there are two in the district. "Do I understand you to testify that the Sunrise mineral survey made by yon was the first mineral survey for patent made in the Paradise mining district?" "It is not They were in the same district, dis-trict, but in a diiferent locality." j The greater portion of the morning pro- : ceedlngs was taken up with interrogations concerning the survey lines of Mr. Garlinski for patents on mineral land in the section in dispute. It looks as though this witness would be on the stand the balance of the week at the present rate of progress of the hearing. The case was running as The Times went to press. |