Gray v. Quicksilver Mining Co.

Decision Date24 June 1895
Citation68 F. 677
PartiesGRAY et al. v. QUICKSILVER MIN. CO.
CourtU.S. District Court — Northern District of California

Pierson & Mitchell, for complainants.

Wm Matthews and E. J. Pringle, for respondent.

McKENNA Circuit Judge (orally).

This is an action to declare defendant trustee of the plaintiffs, or the estate of their intestate, of certain mines and minerals situate on the Rancho De Los Capitancillos (what is known as the 'Almaden Mine '). Both plaintiffs and defendant claim from the Mexican government, through a grant by the latter to one Justo Larios, which grant was patented by the United States in the name of Charles Fossatt, by patent dated February 3, 1865. The patent to the mines and minerals became separated from the title to the land, or was attempted to be separated, by Grove C. Cook, grantee of Justo Larios, calling himself 'allodial owner' of the rancho, by conveying by deed dated April 1, 1848, to plaintiff's intestate John B. Gray, and one Knowles Taylor, in the proportions of two-fifths and three-fifths, respectively, 'together (to quote deed) with the right of way, water, grazing for cattle * * * also land sufficient for establishing smelting works building houses, and all other purposes necessary for the secure and profitable carrying on of the aforementioned mines.'

A trust was declared and created in this property by an instrument dated March 21, 1850, in which it was recited, after setting out certain conveyances, as follows:

'And whereas, other parties or persons than the beforenamed Knowles Taylor and John B. Gray have interest in said purchases, and it being desirable and proper to work said lands, mines, minerals, and ores, and prosecute the business connected therewith; and whereas, the title to said lands, mines, minerals, ores, rights, privileges, interests, and benefits, and their appurtenances, is now standing in the name of said Knowles Taylor and John B. Gray, in the following proportions, to wit, three-fifths part in the name of said Knowles Taylor, and two-fifths part in the name of the said John B. Gray; and it being desirable that each party in interest and ownership should have now this written declaration and conveyance of his interest, or portion in said lands, mines, minerals, ores, rights, privileges, interests, benefits, and the appurtenances of every kind pertaining thereto: Now, know all men by these presents, that we, the said Knowles Taylor and Eliza L., his wife, and the said John Bowie Gray, and Jane M., his wife, for and in consideration of the premises and of the sum of one dollar to each of us paid by the parties thereto of the second part, at and before the ensealing and delivery of these presents, the receipt whereof we and each of us hereby acknowledge, and in further consideration of the payment heretofore made by each of the said parties of the second part of their respective relative proportion of the purchase money of said property, mine;, minerals, ores, et cetera, and of all expenses incident thereto, have granted, bargained, sold, conveyed, and transferred, any by these presents we do grant, bargain, sell, assign, convey, and transfer, unto the said Robert J. Walker, Knowles Taylor, and John Bowie Gray, trustees, as hereinafter mentioned, all and singular the aforedescribed lands, mines, minerals, ores, rights, privileges, interests, benefits, and the appurtenances of every kind which pertain thereto, and by the recited indentures or conveyances aforesaid were conveyed and transferred to the said Knowles Taylor and John B. Gray, together with all the estate, right of dower, title, interest, property, claim, and demand whatsoever of the said Knowles Taylor and Eliza L., his wife, and the said John Bowie Gray and Jane M., his wife, as well at law as in equity, of, in, and to, and out of the same, and every part thereof, from and after the date hereof, and by this indenture, and for the purposes and uses as hereinafter set forth and declared, to be held and possessed by the said Robert J. Walker, Knowles Taylor, and John B. Gray, as associate trustees, their heirs and the survivor of them, his heirs and assigns, forever, as joint tenants, and not as tenants in common, upon the special trust and confidence, however, and for no other purpose than is herein set forth and declared. * * * It is further agreed that with a view to ascertain results and settle controversies, if any should arise, no one of the parties interested will, within any period of two years from this date sell any portion of his interest in said property, mines, minerals, et cetera, to any person not a party to this agreement. The estate, rights, privileges, benefits, and property of the said parties as hereinbefore set forth and granted, or hereafter shall be obtained, shall be and remain vested in the said trustees and their successors, their heirs and assigns, in joint tenancy as aforesaid, but subject to the control and direction of the parties by a vote of not less than two-thirds of the whole number of shares, by the vote in the affirmative of filling any vacancy or vacancies that may occur in the board of said trustees by resignation, death, or otherwise, and to alter these trusts. The objects, designs, and business of the said parties shall be the proper management and administration of the said estate, property, mines, minerals, ores, rights, privileges, benefits, and all other matters and things relating and appertaining thereto, so as to make the said lands and mines active and productive, that the parties may receive the best possible benefit and profit annually therefrom. The whole affair and business of the said parties herein shall be directed and governed, prosecuted, and managed, by the said trustees, or by a majority of them, their successors, their heirs and assigns. And the said trustees, or a majority of them, are hereby authorized and empowered to appoint such agent or agents in the management of the business, and to fix the compensation of such agent or agents, as they shall think proper.'

In January, 1853, Taylor died, leaving Walker and Gray surviving; and on June 2, 1861, Gray died in New York, intestate, leaving plaintiffs as his only heirs at law. Walker is also dead. Prior to his death, he conveyed his individual interest under the trust deed,-- that is, his interest seperate from that as trustee,-- and the defendant became the owner of it. The defendant also claims to be the successor to the title and interest of Forbes, Baron & Co., the old Almaden Company, and the evidence seems to establish that the latter occupied and exclusively worked the mines for years; in hostility to the Laurencel & Eldridge title, under which plaintiffs claim. On the 10th of October, 1863, Christopher E. Hawley presented a petition to the probate court of the county of Santa Clara, setting forth the death of John Bowie Gray; the fact that the names, ages, and residences of the heirs were unknown to him; that the deceased died intestate, owning in fee at the time of his death 111 2/100 equal undivided four-hundredth parts of, in, and to all the 'mines, minerals, and ores, of whatever character or description, that were found on the 1st day of April, A. D. 1848, or that have since been found, or that hereafter may be found, in the tract of land in said state and county in the rancho called 'De Los Capitancillos,' formerly granted to Justo Larios, together with certain rights, privileges, and appurtenances as the same were granted by Grove C. Cook and wife to Knowles Taylor and said deceased John Bowie Gray, by conveyance dated the 1st day of April, 1848; the said property described in said conveyance with certain other property having been by a certain indenture conveyed to Knowles Taylor, John Bowie Gray, and R. J. Walker in trust,' etc. He was appointed November 10, 1863, and qualified February 25, 1864, by giving a bond of $16,200, and letters of administration issued to him on the 25th. Notice to creditors was ordered, and appraisers were appointed, and estate duly appraised at $11,00, on May 2, 1864. Claims aggregating $106,529.24 were presented and duly allowed; and, after due proceedings were had, the interest of said Gray in said mines and minerals was sold to Henry O. Lyons for $27,755, which sale was confirmed by the probate court, and deed executed. Lyons deeded to Butterworth, and the latter to defendant. Hawley was the engineer of the defendant company, and Butterworth was its superintendent.

The claims presented against the estate were as follows: Sidney L. Johnson, $48,617.93; Quicksilver Mining Company $49,579.31; George Flemming, $916.87; Andrew Glassell, $7,416. Sidney L. Johnson's claim was composed of the principal and interest of four notes of $5,000 each, given by one Middleton to Gray, and by the latter to Robert J. Walker, and a note of $10,000 given by Gray to Middleton, and indorsed by the latter to Walker. The $5,000 notes were secured by a mortgage, executed in favor of Walker, by Gray, Middleton, and Walker. There was also attached to the claim, as a voucher, a complaint in a suit brought by Robert J. Walker against Henry H. Taylor, John W. Middleton, et al. This complaint recited the conveyance from Grove C. Cook to Gray and Taylor. The declaration of trust in the property, quoting the substance of the trust deed, states the papers upon which the purchase was made, and the difficulties and controversies over the title and lawsuits conducted by Walker, 'at the wish (to quote the complaint) of Gray,' for which he was to be liberally compensated, and also states the necessity and fact of employing other counsel, the incurring of indebtedness, and disbursing large sums of money. The legal controversies over and in defense of the property are enumerated in the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • Simmons v. Friday
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • September 12, 1949
    ...270 Mass. 497, 170 N.E. 451; Bremer v. Williams, 96 N.E. 687, 210 Mass. 256; Yager v. Liberty Royalties Corp., 123 F. (2d) 44; Gray v. Quicksilver Co., 68 F. 677; Peyton v. Chase County Natl. Bk., 262 Pac. 595, 124 Kan. 763; Bates Co. v. White, 156 Atl. 293, 130 Me. 352; Homer v. Ward, 65 M......
  • MacFadden v. Jenkins
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of North Dakota
    • March 6, 1918
    ...... 99 N.W. 759; Copsey v. Bank (Cal.) 66 P. 8;. Clark v. Eaton, 100 U.S. 146; Gray v. Mining. Co., 68 F. 677-682; Davis & Co. v. Wagon Co., . 20 F. 699; Monongahela Bridge Co. v. ......
  • Simmons v. Friday
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • September 12, 1949
    ...270 Mass. 497, 170 N.E. 451; Bremer v. Williams, 96 N.E. 687, 210 Mass. 256; Yager v. Liberty Royalties Corp., 123 F.2d 44; Gray v. Quicksilver Co., 68 F. 677; Peyton Chase County Natl. Bk., 262 P. 595, 124 Kan. 763; Bates Co. v. White, 156 A. 293, 130 Me. 352; Homer v. Ward, 65 Mass. 62. (......
  • Crawford County Bank v. Bolton
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Arkansas
    • July 13, 1908
    ...26 Am. & Eng. Enc. of L. 899-900; 7 Id. 634; 122 Ill. 293; 4 Ark. 357; 15 Am. & Eng. Enc. of L. 934; 63 Ark. 322; Morawetz on Corp. § 521; 68 F. 677. 2. validity of the sale can not be attacked in this proceeding. The sale was, at most, voidable, and could be avoided by appellee, if at all,......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT