36 rmimnar. anroarnn.
fact of his advancing the money to pay for the purchase of the half in-
e terest conveyed in 1876 by Jesse Ames to Adelbert Ames. At nrst
blush it appears plausible that, having put $25,000 in on the promise
of a mortgage, at a time when there were no partnership debts, he has
an equity superior to that of partnership creditors; buta little reiiection
will make it clear that this claim is without foundation. It is not a case
of a third party putting money into the partnership upon an agreement
‘ for mortgage security. Gen. Butler’s money added; nothing to the re-
sources of the partnership. It was simply money used between one
partner and another, to effect a change of interest. As between the firm
and its creditors it meant nothing. Whether Jesse Ames or Adelbert
Ames was partner was to them immaterial. They took nothing by the
change in interest, hence their equities remain the same as though there
had been no transfer from one partner to the other. Their rights and
equities are the same, their claimupon the partnership property the same,
whether one partner gives or sells a portion of his interest to another
partner. I think the supposed equity does not exist. This disposes of
this case, and a decree will be entered for complainants, as prayed for.
Cnnnsmim et al. v. Snnnvm et al.
` (Oircuit Court, D. Colorado. December 13, 1888.)
1. Mmns AND Mm1Nc—TnnsrAssans.
Parties who attempt to enter, beneath the surface, within the side lines of
the lands of another, and to mine and take ore therefrom, are prima facie ·
trespassers. -
2. SAME—COURTS*FEDERAL Junrsnrorrorr.
Where such entry is claimed to be made under the mining laws of the United
States, and the right to enter turns upon the construction to be given to such
laws, the case is within the jurisdiction of the United States circuit court.
3. INJUNCTION—PBELIMINARY—DIBPUTED Laclu. T1·r1.n-—CoN1·r.rc·rmo Arama-
vIWhere the athdavits are contlicting, a. preliminary injunction will be issued
against trespassers, leaving the question of the title to the property to be set-
i tled by a suit at law.
In Equity. T On bill for injunction.
Application for injunction by Walter S. Cheesman and others against
James A. Shreve and others to prevent trespass upon mining lands.
O. J. Hughes, Jr., for complainants. -
B. F. Montgomery, for defendants.
BREWER, J  . These defendants are entering beneath the surface,
within the sidelines of ground patented to complainants, and seeking to
mine and take ore thereirom. Prima. facie they are trespassers. They
justifythis entrance under authority of the laws of the United States,
and especiallyqsection 2322 of the Revised Statutes, which give to the