Rose vs. Davis, 11 Cal. 133, § 17.

vs. Richmond M. Co., 2 Col. Law Rep. 7. §§ 64, 74. -VS.- (unreported), § 65.

Rosecrans vs. Douglas, 52 Cal. 213, § 64.

Runyan vs. Castor, 14 Pet. 122, § 20.
Rupley vs. Welch, 23 Cal. 452, §§ 56, 148.

S.

Sankey vs. Noyes, 1 Nev. 68, § 158.
Scarlett vs. Lamarque, 5 Col. 63, § 158.
Sears vs. Collins, 1 Col. Law Rep. 489, § 155.
- vs. Taylor, 4 Col. 38, §§ 15, 16, 18, 19.
Settembre vs. Putnam, 30 Cal. 490, § 151a.
Setter vs. Alvoy, 15 Kan. 157, § 27.
Sharon vs. Davidson, 4 Nev. 416, § 158.
Sherman vs. Bruick, 93 U. S. 216, § 65.

Sierra Nevada, &c. Co. vs. Sears, 10 Nev. 346, §158.
Silver vs. Ladd, 7 Wall, 219, §§ 20, 65, 69.
Sims vs. Smith, 7 Cal. 148, §§ 55, 56, 143.

Skilman vs. Lachman, 23 Cal. 198, § 151a.

Skyrme vs. Occidental, &c. Co., 8 Nev. 219, § 156.

Slade vs. Sullivan, 17 Cal. 103, § 158.

Smallhouse vs. Kentucky, &c. Co., 2 Mont. 443, § 156.
Small vs. Gwinn, 6 Cal. 447, § 158.

Smith vs. Doe, 15 Cal. 100, §§ 19, 148.

vs. Moore, 26 Ill. 392, § 37.

vs. North American M. Co., 1 Nev. 123, §§ 2, 6.

- vs. Reynolds, 1 Col. Law Rep. 89, §§ 154, 155.

- vs. Van Cliff, 6 Landowner, 2, § 118.

Southern Cross, &c. Co. vs. Europa M. Co., 15 Nev. 383, §§ 25, 27, 28. Sparrow vs. Strong, 3 Wall. 104, § 2.

Spencer vs. Winselman, 42 Cal. 479, § 153.

Staininger vs. Andrews, 4 Nev, 159. §§ 16, 158.

Stark vs. Starrs, 6 Wall. 402, §§ 29, 65, 67.

Starr vs. Pease, 8 Conn. 541, § 29.

State vs. Curtis, 9 Nev. 325, § 152.
vs. Earl, 1 Nev. 394, § 157.

vs. Eastabrook, 3 Nev. 173, § 157.
vs. Eureka, &c. Co., 8 Nev. 15, § 157.
vs. Kruttschnitt, 4 Nev. 178, § 157.

State vs. Manhattan, &c. Co., 4 Nev. 319, § 157.

vs. Moore, 12 Cal. 56, §§ 138, 157.

vs. Pettineli, 10 Nev. 141, § 152.

vs. Real Del Monte, 1 Nev. 523, § 140.

vs. Wright, 10 Nev. 167, § 152.

St. John vs. Kidd, 26 Cal. 263, §§ 2, 5, 9, 30, 33, 154.

St. Louis Smelting Co. vs. Kemp., 2 Col. Law Rep. 351, §§ 64, 65. Stoddard vs. Chambers, 2 How. 285, § 65.

Stokes vs. Barrett, 5 Cal. 36, § 148. -vs. Monroe, 36 Cal. 383, § 146.

Stone vs. Bumps, 46 Cal. 218, § 150.

Strang vs. Ryan, 46 Cal. 33, §§ 2, 9, 31, 32, 33, 151.
Strettell vs. Ballou, 2 Col. Law Rep. 122, §§ 151, 153.

Sullivan vs. Heuse, 2 Col. 424, §§ 5, 25, 143.

vs. Triunfo, &c. Co., 29 Cal. 585, § 152.

T.

Table Mt. T. Co. vs. Stranahan, 20 Cal. 198, §§ 25, 142, 143, 154.

VS.

21 Cal. 548, §§ 25, 154.

vs., 31 Cal. 387, §§ 5, 6, 9, 143.

Tartar vs. Spring Creek, &c. Co., 5 Cal. 396, § 148.

Taylor vs. Castle, 42 Cal. 367, §§ 151a, 155.

Territory vs. Lee, 2 Mont. 124, § 20.

Thomas vs. Wyatt, 25 Mo. 26, § 64.

Thorn vs. Sweeney, 12 Nev. 251, § 158.

Thorp vs. Freed, 1 Mont. 652, § 56.

Throckmorton vs. Price, 28 Texas, 605, § 27.
Tibbitts vs. Moore, 23 Cal. 208, §§ 153, 156.
Tilton vs. Oregon, &c. Co., 3 Sawyer, 22, § 158.

Titcomb vs. Kirk, 51 Cal. 288, § 150.

Trafton vs. Nougues, 4 Sawyer, 178, §§ 74, 160.

Treadway vs. Sharon, 7 Nev. 37, § 153.

Tuolumne, &c. Co. vs. Chapman, 8 Cal. 392, § 158.

Tyler vs. Wilkinson, 1 Mason, 379, §§ 52, 53.

U.

Union M. & M. Co. vs. Danberg, 2 Sawyer, 450, § 51.

vs. Ferris, 2 Sawyer, 176. §§ 51, 52.

Union Water Co. vs. Crory, 25 Cal. 509, § 54. "nited States vs. Arredondo, 6 Pet. 691, §

§ 29.

United States vs. Chapman, 5 Sawyer, 528, § 65.
vs. Gear, 3 How. 132, § 158.

vs. Heth, 3 Cranch, 399, § 29.
vs. Hughes, 11 How. 568, § 51.
vs. Nelson, 5 Sawyer, 68, § 49.
vs. Parrott, 1 McAll. 271, § 158.
vs. Stone, 2 Wall. 525, § 64.

vs. Thomas McEntee, 23 Int. Rev. Rec. 368, § 49.

V.

Van Dusen vs. Star Q. M. Co., 36 Cal. 571, § 74.
Van Etten vs. Jilson, 6 Cal. 19, §§ 153, 160.
Van Renssalaer vs. Kearney, 11 How. 325, § 66.
Van Sickle vs. Haines, 7 Nev. 249, §§ 51, 52.

Van Valkenburg vs. Huff, 1 Nev. 142, §§ 25, 143.

Van Zandt vs. Argentine M. Co., 1 Col. Law Rep. 524, §§ 21, 22, 26, 36 Vermont, &c. Co. vs. Windham Bank, 44 Vt. 489, § 152.

Von Schmidt vs. Huntington, 1 Cal. 70, § 30.

W.

Waldron vs. Marsh, 5 Cal. 119, § 158.

Walsh vs. Hill, 38 Cal. 481, § 17.

Waring vs. Crow, 11 Cal. 366, §§ 17, 33, 145, 151, 154, 158.

Warnock vs. Wightman, 1 Brev. 339, § 27.

Watts vs. White, 13 Col. 321, §§ 138, 153.

Weaver vs. Eureka Lake Co., 15 Cal. 271, § 53.
Weill vs. Lucerne M. Co., 11 Nev. 200, §§ 33, 143.
Weimer vs. Lowery, 11 Cal. 104, §§ 17, 143, 148.
Welch vs. Phillips, 11 Nev. 187, § 160.

Welland vs. Huber, 8 Nev. 203, § 155.
Whittaker vs. Williams, 20 Conn. 104, § 65.
Whitman M. Co. vs. Baker, 3 Nev. 386, § 25.
Wiggins vs. Buckham, 10 Wall. 129, § 143.
Wilcox vs. Jackson, 13 Pet. 516, §§ 63, 67.
Williamson vs. Brown, 15 N. Y. 354, § 27.
- vs. N. J. S. R. Co., 29 N. J. Eq. 311, § 29.

Wiseman vs. McNulty, 25 Cal. 230, §§ 30, 151, 154.
Wixon vs. Bear River, &c. Co., 24 Cal. 367, §§ 56, 148.
Wolfekill vs. Malajowich, 39 Cal. 276, § 17.

FS. Eu Volfly vs. Lebanon M. Co., 4 Col. 112, § 34,
Vs. Voolman vs. Garringer, 1 Mont. 535, §§ 53,54.

Y.

Yosemite Valley Case, 15 Wall. 77, §§ 4, 63.

Z.

Zollers vs. Evans, 1 Col. Law Rep. 217, §§ 21, 26, 158.

A MANUAL

OF

AMERICAN MINING LAW.

ANNOTATED.

CHAPTER I.

THE RULES AND CUSTOMS OF MINERS.
SECTION 1-Origin of miners' rules and customs.

2-Rules and customs recognized by the courts.
3-Recognition by Congress.

4-Paramount authority of acts of Congress.
5-Existence of custom, question of fact.
6-Whether custom is in force.

7-Same-Conflict between rules and customs.
8-Pleading.

9-Construction of local customs.

10-Rules and customs affected by state laws.

§ 1. Origin of miners' rules and customs.-The Government of the United States, holding the only title to the public lands, is the paramount proprietor, and exclusive rights to occupy and explore any portion of the unoccupied domain of the general government, in the search for precious metals, must be derived either from the direct or tacit consent of such proprietor, we would naturally seek for the foundation of such rights as miners originally claimed to have acquired to portions of