Trabucco

A rehearing was granted in this cause, not by reason of any doubt as to the correctness of the conclusions heretofore reached, but for the purpose of restraining and setting forth excerpts from the testimony contained in the transcript showing that the findings of the trial court are sufficiently supported. With this in view we follow in the main the language of the original opinion.

The plaintiffs had judgment against the defendants in an action of ejectment involving the ownership of the east half of the southwest quarter of section 13, township 4 south, range 18 east, M. D. B. & M. Prom this judgment the defendant appeals.

At the conclusion of the trial the court made, the following findings of fact:

The court further found that the defendant, on or about the tenth day of July, 1927, located a certain mining claim known as and called “Big Pine Number 1 Quartz Claim”, and placed the point of discovery within the boundaries of the lands found to belong to the plaintiffs, as hereinbefore described, and that the defendant was wrongfully in possession of the premises claimed by him. Conclusions of law were drawn to the effect that the plaintiffs were the owners of the premises…