Samuel Blatchford

“ After a replication, proofs were taken on both sides, and the circuit court decided in favor of the plaintiff, upon the ground that, under the laws of Arkansas in force at the time the taxes were assessed, for the non-payment of which the land was sold, it was necessary that the mine, having been separated from the surface soil, should be separately assessed, and it could not be sold for taxes, except upon such an assessment; and that neither the mine, nor the mineral in it, was, in the present case, assessed or sold. ”

“ The court made a decree perpetually enjoining the defendant from entering upon or removing the mineral or any part thereof from the land, and further ordering that an account be taken of the quantity and value of the mineral and ore already removed by the defendant from the land, and that the defendant account to the plaintiff for its value, and appointing a master to take said account, and to hear evidence, and report the same to the court. ”

“ Brinkerhoff, 106 U.S. 3, 1 Sup. Ct. Rep. 15; Grant v. Insurance Co., 106 U.S. 429, 1 Sup. Ct. Rep. 414; Dainese v. Kendall, 119 U.S. 53, 7 Sup. Ct. Rep. 65; Parsons v. Robinson, 122 U.S. 112, 7 Sup. Ct. ”