State of Nevada vs. The California Mining Company.

Case No. 2.

State of Nevada vs. The Consolidated Virginia Mining Company.

Cases Nos. 1 and 2.

These three cases are in all material respects the same as the case of The State vs. The California Mining Company, No. 1, and upon the authority in that case the judgments of the Court below were reversed, with permission to the defendants to answer within a reasonable time.

State of Nevada vs. William Soule.

Judgment reversed and cause remanded for new trial.

State of Nevada vs. John Davis.

Indicted for jail-breaking. Judgment affirmed.

State of Nevada vs. M. Marks.

Convicted of an assault with intent to kill. Judgment affirmed.

In the Circuit Court of the United States, of the Ninth Judicial Circuit, in and for the District of Nevada. In Re, Rudolph on habeas

corpus.

Judge Sawyer holds the law (commonly known as the "Drummer Act") to be Constitutional, and does not conflict with Subdivision 3 of Section 8, of the Constitution of the United States, and remanded the prisoner to the custody of the Sheriff of Storey county. No writ of error has, as yet, been applied for in this case, nor do I think the petitioner will apply for one, as the Supreme Court of the United States has affirmed similar judgments from other States, and admitting the power of the several States to impose a license tax on traveling merchants or solicitors.

State of Nevada vs. Robert Frazier.

Appealed from the Sixth Judicial District Court in and for the County of Lincoln, from an order granting a change of venire.

Appeal dismissed upon the ground that no appeal can be taken from an order granting or refusing to change the place of trial, it not being a final judgment.

State of Nevada vs. Ah Sam.

Appealed from the Fourth Judicial District Court in and for the County of Humboldt. Convicted of the crime of resorting to a place kept for the purpose of smoking opium. Judgment affirmed.

State of Nevada vs. James Foley and George Tracy.

Appealed from the First Judicial District Court, in and for the County of Storey; charge, burglary. The judgment in this case was reversed and cause sent back for new trial, on the ground that the principal and only eye-witness upon which the conviction was had was a person who had been tried, convicted and sentenced to the California State Prison on two charges of felonies, had served out his full term of imprisonment on both charges, was pardoned and restored to citizenship by the Governor of the State of California on one of the offenses, but has not been pardoned or restored to citizenship for the other.

Under Section 1,441, Compiled Laws of this State, a person against whom judgment has been rendered, upon a conviction for felony, unless pardoned, shall not be a witness.

State of Nevada vs. John T. Pritchard.

Appealed from the Second Judicial District Court, in and for the County of Ormsby; charge, murder. Convicted of murder in the first degree. Sentenced to be hanged. Appealed from an order overruling defendant's motion for a new trial.

Judgment reversed and cause remanded for a new trial, on the ground that the Court erred in refusing the defendant the right of a peremptory challenge to a juror after the panel was full but before the jurors were sworn to try the cause.

This cause is again on appeal to the Supreme Court. Pritchard has had his second trial in the same Court; found guilty of murder in the second degree; sentenced to confinement in the State Prison for life. Moved for a new trial, upon the ground that the Court erred in allowing a challenge to one of the jurors, taken by the State after the jurors had been sworn to try the cause.

Pritchard's attorney applied to the Judges of the Supreme Court for a writ of habeas corpus, claiming that the petitioner should be discharged from custody, upon the ground that the jury having been

sworn to try the case, the defendant was placed in jeopardy by the allowing of said challenge by the Court. The petition was dismissed, the Court holding that habeas corpus was not the proper remedy in cases of this kind, and his action would have to be prosecuted by appeal. This appeal will be argued at the January term of the Supreme Court, in 1881.

State of Nevada vs. Charles Wesley Hymer.

Appealed from the Fourth Judicial District Court, Humboldt County. Convicted of murder in the first degree; sentenced to be hanged. Appealed from an order overruling defendant's motion for a new trial. Judgment affirmed. Made application to the Board of Pardons for a commutation of sentence to imprisonment for life. Request denied, and Hymer was hanged on the 27th day of April, 1880.

Ex Parte George White and Joseph Pergue.

On writ of habeas corpus. The petitioners were arrested, and pleaded guilty to a charge of misdemeanor on the 1st day of February, 1880. Waived the time prescribed by the statute for passing sentence. The Justice of the Peace thereupon passed sentence and rendered judgment, imposing a fine and imprisonment. The 1st day of February being Sunday, the judgment rendered by the Justice of the Peace was null and void.

State of Nevada vs. G. W. McLane, Jr., and Frank McIntire.

Appealed from the Sixth Judicial District Court, in and for the County of Lincoln. Convicted of murder in the first degree, and sentenced to be hanged.

Appealed from an order overruling a motion for new trial.

Judgment affirmed as to McIntire, and reversed as to McLane. McIntire made application to the Board of Pardons for a commutation of sentence from death penalty to that of imprisonment in the State Prison, which application was granted, and the term of imprisonment fixed for life. McLane was put upon his second trial on the 25th day of November, A. D. 1880, in White Pine County, a change of venue having been granted.

State of Nevada vs. Jose Lopez.

Appealed from the Seventh Judicial District Court, Elko County. Convicted of murder in the first degree; sentenced to be hanged. Appealed from an order overruling a motion for a new trial.

Judgment reversed and new trial granted, on the ground that the jury were permitted to view the premises where the homicide is alleged to have been committed, and while there received evidence from a person not under oath and had not been sworn as a witness, and the statements were made in the absence of the defendant.

State of Nevada vs. Ralph Johnson and J. B. Murphy.

Appealed from the Sixth Judicial District Court, Eureka County. Convicted of the crime of robbery. Sentenced to the State Prison for the term of two years each. Appealed from an order overruling a motion for a new trial. Submitted on briefs. Not yet decided.

State of Nevada vs. Ah Goun.

Appealed from the Sixth Judicial District Court, in and for Eureka County. Convicted of selling opium. Sentenced to one year in the State Prison. Appealed from the judgment of the Court. Appellant claims that the law under which he was convicted is unconstitutional, because it is in conflict with the fourteenth amendment of the Constitution of the United States.

State of Nevada vs. Antone Vasques.

Appealed from the Sixth Judicial District Court, in and for Eureka County. Charged with the crime of murder; convicted of murder in the second degree; sentenced to the State Prison for fifteen years. Appealed from an order overruling a motion for a new trial. Submitted on briefs.

State of Nevada vs. William Pierce.

Appealed from the Second Judicial District Court, in and for the County of Ormsby. Charged with the crime of murder; convicted of murder in the second degree; sentenced to the State Prison for twenty years. Appealed from an order overruling motion for a new trial. Judgment affirmed.

State of Nevada vs. Ou Gee How.

Appealed from the First Judicial District Court, Storey County. The defendant was indicted for a violation of the opium law. He demurred to the indictment; demurrer was overruled; he was con

victed; moved for an arrest of judgment; motion overruled; and he was sentenced to imprisonment in the State Prison. Appealed from the judgment of the Court. Judgment reversed, and cause remanded on the ground of defects in the indictment.

Ex Parte William Willoughby on Writ of Habeas Corpus.

The petitioner had been arrested and was committed to await the action of the Grand Jury, charged with "being an accessory before the fact" to the murder of P. L. Traver.

Petition dismissed and petitioner remanded to the custody of the Sheriff.

State of Nevada ex rel. James Farris vs. A. J. Hatch, SurveyorGeneral of the State of Nevada.

This was a petition for a writ of mandamus, to compel A. J. Hatch, as Register of the State Land Office, to issue a patent in the name of James Farris, for land purchased from this State by one Joseph T. Mier, James Farris being the grantee of the said Joseph T. Mier, claimed that the patent should issue to him and in his own

name.

The petition was dismissed, the Court holding that the patent should issue in the name of the party making the application to purchase the land from the State.

Since the making of my last report, I have learned that no claim has ever been made by the State of Nevada, or any of its agents, for the five per cent. to which this State is entitled for lands remaining unsold within her territorial limits, under the Act of Congress of March 3d, 1857, and set apart as reservations for the various tribes of Indians. I have made out and sent to John Mullan and S. I. Wails a Power of Attorney to act for the State of Nevada in this matter, and to ask, demand and receive all sums of money that may be due this State from the Government of the United States. Under and by virtue of said Power of Attorney, the persons therein. named did, on the 8th day of March, A. D. 1880, make a demand upon the Commissioner of the General Land Office, at Washington, D. C., to state an account between the United States and the State of Nevada, of the amount due this State for the lands so situate, but the Commissioner of the General Land Office declines to make any such statement, basing his refusal so to do upon a decision of R. W. Taylor, First Comptroller, rendered November 4th, 1875, in rejecting a similar claim from Nebraska.

Before any further action can be had, the attorneys for the State at Washington will be put to considerable trouble and expense, and