Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 8.djvu/706

692 federal befobtbb. �Eehaedt and others v. Boaeo and others. {Circuit Court, D. Collyraio. Juae 20, 1881.) �1. EQmTT. �One cannot take advantage of his o^wn wrong. �2. MlKBS — DiSCOVEBBKS — LOOATOBS — iTfJUITCTION. �Where prospectors on the public domain, on discovering minerai, set tip their discovery stake and fully complied with the requirements of the state law, except in a single particular, hdd, on an application for an injunction to restrain the defendants who had pulled up the stake, entered into possession, and located the claim, from working the claim and removing ore therefrom, that, as the plaintifEs were prevented by the defendants from complying wIth the statuts in that single particular, their rights would not be prejudiced thereby and the injunction ivould' be granted. �Application for Injunction. �M. B. Carpenter, Wells, Smith e Macon, for plaintiffs, , Markham,.Patterson, Thomas e Camphell, for defendants. �Milles, Justice», Plaintiffs, while prospecting on the public domain, discovered minerai within about two feet of the surface of theground, and on the seventeentb.dayof June set up their disoovery stake, containing the name of the Iode, — Hawk, — the date of the dis- covery, the name of the discoverers, and the other matters sub- stantially as required by law. On the thirtieth day of June, 13 days thereafter, the defendants pulled up the stake so set by the plaintiffs, threw it away, entered into possession, and went to work in the same hole, and having sunk the shaft to the required depth, made a location of the claim. �Plaintiffs brought their action at law for the possession, alleging that they were the discoverers thereof, had planted their discovery stake, and within the CO days p.llpwed by law in which to, complete the sinking of their prospect ahaft and make their formallocation, the defendants wrongfuljy cntered and hold the claim; and plaintiffs s^pk an injunction, in aid of their action at law, to restrain the defendants from working the claim and removing ore therefrom. The affidavits filed in support of the motion for injunction show that in consequence of threats njade by defendants, plaintiffs were deterred from entering on the claim and prosecuting the development work within the time required, and that,.though they procured a survey to be made upon which to make out a location certificate, this was done eecretly, by the officer who made the survey for defendants. It is claimed for defendants that the plaintiffs were not in actual posses- sion ot the claim between the seventeenth day of June, the time they ��� �