State v. . Burt
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Labceny, tried before Watts, J., at Spring Term 1870,, of Fbahklih Court. There was a special verdict, finding: that there was a verbal contract between Burt and the owner of a gold mine, that the former'might run a rocker in such mine, paying a certain rent; that the other defendants were working with Burt; that one of these employees found a nugget of gold lying upon the land of the owner of the mine, on the top of a rock pile, not a part of the proceeds of the rocker; and…
Read the full summary
Labceny, tried before Watts, J., at Spring Term 1870,, of Fbahklih Court. There was a special verdict, finding: that there was a verbal contract between Burt and the owner of a gold mine, that the former'might run a rocker in such mine, paying a certain rent; that the other defendants were working with Burt; that one of these employees found a nugget of gold lying upon the land of the owner of the mine, on the top of a rock pile, not a part of the proceeds of the rocker; and that, after consultation with the other defendants, it was appropriated to their own use, and was never accounted for…
1Opinion of the CourtDick, J.
Nuggets of gold are lumps of native metal, and are often found separated from the original veins. When this separation is produced by natural causes, there is no severance from the realty, but such nuggets will pass under a conveyance, like ores and minerals which are embedded in the earth. When ores and minerals are taken out of mines with expense, skill and labor, to be converted into metals, or used for the purposes of trade and commerce, they- become personal property, and are under the protection of the criminal law. J
In England, ores, even before they are taken from the mines, are…
2Cited by2 opinions
- State v. . GravesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1876
- State v. Beck.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1906