Show S MINING SUIT AFFIRMED Supreme Court DeCISIOn In Case Cale of vs s Dirk Et M AI AICOla MCase COla Case of 01 tic aho Strum n c CA tA Doh I Alsi A j The fM an opinIon Ion In th the ohM Ie of lIeber Id Well appellant vs VI Id V IV Davis and C If 11 judgment ot of th the court below The In tItle case made before the United States for patent for tor the Mountain Mayd and Gold Cold fleet neet minIng claiMs sit It tn In the wt West Mountain district and the appellant tiled an aD adverse claim claiming a title to lo certain mining ground round called the Wells Well Lode In cone con filet with th the round ground Included In the respondents for patent In support of his blA dver claIm Mr II Wells Well brought action to determine bl his title to the property In The denied appellants right or title to the ground and u 81 an n defense alleged that the they were tile the land and prayed for tor an adjudIcation and judgment to that The WU t I May be before Judge lilies lUtea who kind In favor ot of the respondent From that Judgment ap appellant appealed For a r reversal ver l counsel for tor appellant relied upon two point First that the notIces ot of location were In Indefinite and nd uncertain and that therefore thy they should hould not have bave been admitted In that the were wert erroneously permUted permItted to show by expert pert testimony Robert that certaIn work done don by respondents had a tendency to develop both ot of the mining claims bt be belonging longing to them thim especIally When U It was not shown hon that suck expert witness had hadl hada a l personal k owl ot of the courses ot of the veins although h he generally knew and hd had the minIng ground In dispute As to 10 the tite flit point the Supreme court fInds it bollt untenable le Sad and also heidi holdi that the second point Was AI not well ta taken The Th opinion wu was livered delivered b by District Judge Chief Justice Bartch and Justice Miner concurring SUIT lIT n 1 n 13 Au u b by tho City David Dald B h hiss tiled Iliad an n Lion against lb the munIcIpalIty ot of Salt lAke Land and na Water Commis Commissioner Ioner 8 n 13 WesterfIeld and nd hi his deputy Young to prevent the defendants from blocking an alleged highway In Parleys The complaint alleges that the road In question Is II a public highway and has hal been used by as such uch for tor years yera that lb the defendants topped stopped hIm from driving a heard of cattle along Ionar the road and nd compelled him to go 0 In a way to hi his dam damage age lit the sum lIm of GO 60 The suit I is brought to determine the powers of tb the city to prevent tock stack be belog lug log driven along tb the county countr road mad In canyon so 10 a as to prevent befoul befouling 1 ing of the water of the creek from which the city cUy derives a lat large persist Age ce of Its Ita water supply Court ilon In o or of ot 01 al aI n t O 0 A Tb The Supreme court on at firmed the judgment of the court be below below low In the c case ot of the Standard Steam Laundry vs C A Dole Plaintiff to thIs action brought suit It asking be compelled to account for tor certain etc of 01 certain real pellO personal al prop property erty eat employed In conducting the hun laun laundry dry and that the round found due be credited as AI redemption money to be belld to redeem there the real ette from sale NIt under a mort mortgage Defendant set Itt up a and averred that b be wu Ute the ow owner by pur purchase eha chase and assignment of certain executed and delivered d to the Laundry Laundr Machinery ry Company by br O 0 A and II E T Woolley for the Purchase price of the laundry machinery that the note not that title to tb the ins nuL w wu not nol to pus pall until unU nit they were 1 maid In full that to prevent the taking of the I laundry machinery the ant WU was to 0 purchase tham and pay the balance balence due on them neither the plaintiff nor Mr the makers having paid them and that he altO also paid certaIn tax taxes and ox for repairs repair on the property Plaintiff In It Its replication denIed then the ci aile alleged that t the notes were paid ur ncr a certain a agree meat made with t lilies whom the ones CUll was 81 tried allowing Lb the defendant a lie heft the laundry ma machinery chinery for tor the bunt of the not notes paid b by him and tb the real estate for lor forthe th the sums paid by na for tor taxes and rl rc pairs patta ond nd other m i The court also hil that Chat the wu was to redee redeem the upon payment of uda veral Ie epa the rental ofte premises at the rte rate ot of It 51 per th from February UM 1550 to J rr Ith 1500 J m this thle dec decree and nt ep ap appealed pealed but the seems m court found no reversible error I lie record and b hence the jud t The Th opinion othe oth court was do de livered by Dartch Bartch JUI Jias tic tices Miner lIner td skIn kin concurring 0 IJ Ill tillS Un tiny Judge nile ded the following CU case Saturday David Wolfe elt ci v vs Nicholas Nichol castro judgment for Edmund U 11 U Ul v vs Castro judgment for tor David Wolfe 1 vs O G and Nicholas CO judgment Lot lor d ale fondant hattie lIttI n hi Your Im com tidings fIlIngs and decree tor or defendant Ito Ite right to remove the an Placed b by It on t of during durin the tho uder Iller the lease The Groesbeck n vo Prank Frank t M Wilson et for plaintiff Frank Frnk Stephn hays it et 11 judgment quIeting hie hi title to the In dispute D B H 11 P Lynch it et at 1 judgment for tor Nw New Ung company 8 Mien Allen O I eLl notion of do de to QU quae overruled Ills 1118 1 I U II to Court Jm James If 11 divorce t wife X May A Thomas tn in the cou court Sat Saturday urdA allegIng alln th plaintiff I is an n Inmate ot of an Pa where avers lIe he says YI hU been tot for the put past live ra raThe The n to the Ibe corn com plaint married ata slight acquaint acquaintance nce ance In July I 2 1892 1590 At that time ht h w was nand XI and hI his wife 17 Thomas says laY was a weak isI Ired at t tile the time ut of the lie Ite 5 h lie dl did not know it but ris It was 81 to her ht father M other relatives a telegraph o r ator There II I a boy now nearly six Ix ean J In tIne cue case ot of n Farrar vs I Paul PaulE E n II Hammer re 1111 lilies today gave v JUdgment for tor for 1180 Judgment for InUit for tor was waa also Ito render rende Jud Judge JIll lilieS today In the OUt ease of O 0 vi August lIn n et al alUla 1 Up Ula 1 Charles White Whit youth of 01 eighteen was wa before JUd Judge Norrell today on char charge ot of burglary lIe He WI was gIven ti II next Saturday to plead |