Show DISTRICT judge sutherland for a xou suit on the motion for nonsuit non suit in ahe cintio mining buit judge suther land occupied the whole of wednesday afternoon and thursday roo session of court his argument concluding shortly after the noon recess today to day the motion is based upon three general grounds and numerous sub divi the first of which is that the delen daiil has not alleged an equitable croft cau c of action because 1 the cross complaint tenders no issue affecting the property to which the principal action relates and 2 the title is legal on both aidea and there la no leleck m the legal remedy the second ground claimed is a material variance be tween the allegations of the cros complaint and the proof 3 the defendant has showy no title to alio premises in controversy under this division it is argued jl the premises in controversy arc outside the boundaries of the eureka claim and defendants have not attempted to show title to any ground hut the eureka 2 it has not been successfully shown that the eureka vein ia broad and covers the eureka and bullion claims and 3 even if the court find the vein has such the should fail because a it is not shown that the eureka claim ij i j the first located upon the vein and b if the vein is broader than the eureka claim it should be bounded by vertical sidelines the arguments advanced by judge sutherland have been upon all the points raised very thorough and exhaustive and illus and explained by numerous diagrams aud tracings he was followed by arthur brown in support of the motion air brown stated that his argument would be maidl directed to a discussion of the last point b raked S L tribune |