1. Mines and Minino — Width oe Claim — Validity oe Patent.

Under Rev. St. § 2320, a patent cannot be issued for a mining claim exceeding 300 feet in. width, although the original location was wider, and was made under the law of July 26, 1866, by which the width of claims was regulated according to the custom of miners; and, where a patent is issued for the full width of such claim, it is void as to the excess, and Rev. St. § 2328, cannot he construed to preservo a right to the issuance of a patent covering the full width of the original location. 53 Fed. Rep. 838, affirmed.

8. Landlord and Tenant — Estoppel to Deny Title.

. In an action of ejectmeut by the patentee of a mining claim, where it appears from a stipulation agreed upon by both parties that certain defendants, after the date of the patent, paid a.small sum as rent for the privilege of occupying the premises, and it does not appeal' under what circumstances, nor for what premises, nor for what time, such payment was made, the relation of landlord and tenant is not established so as to estop defendants from denying the patentee’s title. 53 Fed. Rep. 333, affirmed.

3. Same.

An understanding that certain defendants who entered after the date of the patent without the patentee’s permission did so without objection by the patentee, provided its use and enjoyment of the premises were not interfered with, is not sufficient to establish the relationship of landlord and tenant, so as to* estop defendants from denying the patentee’s title. S3 Fed. Rep. 333, affirmed.

4 Same — -Appeal.

Where there are two classes of defendants, one of whom is not estopped to deny the patentee’s title, and the classes are not distinguished, nor the defendants composing each class identified, the record does not enable the appellate court to apply a remedy as to those defendants who are not estopped, and the judgment below in favor of both classes should therefore be affirmed as to all.