Emma Silver Mine In Little Cottonwood Canyon, Utah
Index For This Page
This page was last updated on July 30, 2025.
Overview
(The focus of this research is to establish the dates and names of companies and persons involved in the story of the Emma Silver Mine, as gleaned from sources not likely used in previous works.)
(Read a general history of the mines in Little Cottonwood Canyon, especially after 1901)
(The source for almost all of the following is extensive research in available online newspapers. The wide variety of source newspapers from across the U. S., and in Great Britain, as would be expected, covered the various events with a wide variety of comment and viewpoints. As mentioned above, the focus has been to get the names and dates correct. The interested reader should note that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, especially while doing research in newspapers.)
Many popularized histories of mining in Utah mention the Emma mine as the most famous, and most infamous mine in all of Utah History. Although this simply isn't true, it makes a good story; easy to tell. The Emma Mine was in Little Cottonwood Canyon on the canyon's south-facing slope just above the town of Alta, and became the first of several very rich silver mines in Utah. It became famous because eager British investors with money to burn paid their millions of dollars, to reap the easy rewards. Then, a short time later when the rich silver vein was lost after the miners hit a fault, those same, now angry investors, claimed "Swindle!". Charges of fraud flew across the Atlantic. Supposedly, the governments became involved. There were bitter and stinging accusations back and forth, claiming that this rich little hole in the ground was in fact not so rich.
It was a juicy story, and the press in Salt Lake City, New York, London and Glasgow grabbed it and made the most of it, simply to sell newspapers, and spread fear, uncertainty and doubt. And the public, not knowing the details, ate it up. But the story, big and important as the press tried to make it, soon died down as the details became known. Later investigations found that almost all the negative stories were grand statements of corruption and conflicting ownership. Some were planted by stock market "Bears" on both sides of the Atlantic who sought to drive the price of the stock down, allowing them to buy at reduced prices. Others were planted to hide the original investors' embarrassment.
The result was that in the years up until the Emma scandal in the early and mid 1870s, British and other foreign investment in Utah mining operations had been on the rise. After the scandal, it almost completely stopped and investment money became hard to come by. Local mining men knew what was in the ground, and in many cases, it was local investors, and investors in Detroit, Cincinnati and Boston who would keep the industry going, and who would develop the properties and receive the millions of dollars as their reward. In the case of the Emma, new ore veins were found almost immediately, but that fact was seldom reported in the press.
But even more can be said of the false charges being thrown about in the press, in the court rooms, and in March and April 1876, as testimony in the committee rooms of the U. S. Congress. Much of the bad press came from the confusion and disagreement of original ownership. Almost all of the falsehoods stem from James Lyon's strident and continued attempts to claim ownership of the Emma mine, from late 1870, through to the settlement of early 1882. Lyon testified before Congress in 1876 that he had no assets, no income, no bank accounts and no property. He lived solely by borrowing from friends.
Lyon was originally a resident of Wisconsin in 1870, then briefly of Utah during the period of attempted injunction in late 1870, at which time he moved his activities to Britain. There, he borrowed money for his expenses, but failed to repay the loan and was found in contempt of the bankruptcy court. He then fled Britain for Paris, and remained out of both the U. S. and Great Britain until 1874 when he returned to New York (no longer being welcome in Great Britain). Lyon was included in the 1882 settlement, although all other parties were equally convinced that he no standing due to his amazingly bad reputation. His argument was supported by the fact that the original record books of the 1865-1870 period had been destroyed by fire, or stolen or lost, so any claim of original ownership was based solely on the recollection of other miners in the district, and on conflicting sworn statements. The numerous judges and courts did their best to quiet the arguments, with the result being a settlement that none of the parties on both sides of the Atlantic were happy with.
(The Congressional investigation, of the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives, began on February 28, 1876, taking testimony through May 5, 1876. The final report was issued on May 25, 1876.)
The investigation of 1876 found that the scoundrels in the whole Emma mine episode were Trenor W. Park and William M. Stewart in America, and Albert Grant in Britain. The subject of the investigation, Robert C. Schenck was also found to be a willing, but unintentional accomplice due to his standing as the U. S. Minister to the British royal court. Park and Stewart first devised the scheme, buying control of the Emma mine with the intention of selling it to foreign investors for high returns. They then traveled to Britain and found their way to Albert Grant, who willingly helped them sell stock to any and all who might be attracted to the promise of high and regular dividends. The investors began questioning their decisions when James Lyon showed up and began talking-down the value of the mine, hoping to buy up the shares as they became available at reduced prices. Although many said so at the time, and it was dutifully reported over the next 100 years, at no time during the court cases and investigations was it stated, or did the facts presented say that the Emma was a losing, or exhausted mine. Direct questioning of mining men in Utah found that the ore was there, but that, like so many mines in the region, the management was almost always incompetent, especially when foreign absentee investors were involved; short-term profits being the goal over long-term development and production.
In a proposed memorial to the U. S. House of Representatives in March 1876, a group of "memorialists" made several statements of support for the true value of the Emma mine. (Salt Lake Tribune, March 14, 1876)
- In the last year, the mines of Utah had produced $7 million of bullion, and that the Little Cottonwood District alone had produced $3.5 million, mostly from the vein in which the Emma mine is situated.
- These results had been through the efforts of the miners themselves, residents of Utah, while a large number of the most valuable mines held by foreign corporations have been allowed to remain unworked, or have been so badly managed as to produce comparatively nothing. That among these the Emma mine was a conspicuous example of neglect and bad management, that while other mines upon the same vein, namely the Flagstaff, Vallejo, South Star and Titus, North Star, Prince of Wales, Read & Benson, Davenport and many others, were less promising in the beginning but have been worked from 800 to 1200 feet in depth with the most satisfactory results, nothing has been done on the Emma but the most wasteful extraction of the large body of ore found at the surface.
- The fact that a fault occurred in the Emma mine was no reason for its abandonment, for the same thing has occurred in nearly every mine on the vein, and is usual in silver mines.
- That the Emma is no exception to the other mines on the same vein as regards continuance in depth, is daily accumulating by developments made by other parties in running deep tunnels under the Emma mine, that the reputation of this mine during 1871 and 1872, was unsurpassed by anything known in the United States except the great Comstock.
- That the Emma mine, with ordinary good management would have continued to pay dividends, and been satisfactory to its owners, and that the cause of failure has been the very wasteful, negligent and unskillfull management in the hands of a foreign corporation.
The following summary comes from the October 18, 1873 issue of the Utah Mining Gazette.
(Emma Hill was the entire south-facing slope of Little Cottonwood Canyon, above the town of Alta)
The Emma Mine is situated on Emma Hill, on the northerly slope of Little Cottonwood Canyon, about ten miles from its mouth. It was discovered in 1869 by James F. Woodman, recorded February 25, 1870, and is to-day one of the successfully operated mines of the Territory, notwithstanding so many reports to the contrary. It was the first fully developed mine in Utah. The Emma contains 2,400 linear feet by 100 feet in width and consists of very rich deposits of galena ores, mainly carbonates and oxides of lead carrying silver and at a great depth sulphurets are found in large quantities. Situated in the dolomite, the developments of the mine fully demonstrate that this class of lime rock is not only rich in silver, but also carries a large percentage of lead.
The first discoveries were not at all calculated to justify the present results or to raise very extravagant expectations; and, in fact, so little was known of its real worth that a practical miner deemed it a waste of time to work upon it for the simple remuneration of a certain number of feet. But in the end of the year 1869 a vast body of rich mineral was struck at a depth of 127 feet which created an entire change in the aspect of this property. Subsequently the ores were shipped to Swansea, Great Britain, and the assay value of several returns averaged $118 per ton, but still its true character was not appreciated, as that same winter a half interest in the mine could have been purchased for less than $3,000. But as further developments were made its real value became evident, and in the spring of 1870 $30,000 was paid for one-sixth interest.
Afterwards the mine was sold to an organized company, called the Emma Silver Mining Company of Utah, who sold again at a greatly advanced price to some New York capitalists. In August, 1871, a Government patent was obtained for the mine; and in November of the same year the New York Company disposed of it to its present owners, the Emma Silver Mining Company of London (Limited).
The mine has an elevation of about 8,500 feet above the sea, and as it is also situated at a great elevation above the level of the Canyon, it was confidently thought that no trouble could ever be occasioned by water; and consequently the flooding of the mine in the spring of 1872 found the company totally unprepared for any such contingency. Should a similar catastrophe occur in the future, however, the two steam pumps which have since been erected will be sufficient to keep the mine dry.
The improvements of the Emma Company are first-class in every particular, the buildings commodious and substantial, and the arrangements very complete for winter work. The many buildings, the tunnel of 375 feet, the steam hoisting machinery, and the tramway for the conveyance of waste material from the mine all show that the company has been most enterprising and lavish of expenditure in everything pertaining to the successful development of the property, and have also inaugurated the most important improvements in the district. The quantity of ore taken out of the mine during the years 1870 and 1871 was about 5,000 tons, and in 1872 more than 10,500 tons, a daily average of thirty-five tons. The assays show an average value of $100 dollars of all ores, a proportion of 100 ounces of silver and forty per cent lead to a ton of ore. A small portion of the ore has been sent to local smelting works, but the greater part has been shipped direct to Swansea.
It may be admitted that British investors in American mines have not always had their expectations realized, and in some cases may have been losers by their adventures, but where failures in investments have occurred it has not been because the mines are worthless by any means, but it has been the result of a combination of circumstances in which English purchasers perchance have been as much to blame as American vendors.
The following summary comes from an October 1880 report by D. B. Huntley, published in 1885 as "Mining Industries of Utah," in the "Reports of the Tenth Census, Appendix I."
The Emma mine is situated half-way up the southern slope of a high steep ridge called Emma hill. It was located in 1868 by Woodman, Chisholm, Woodhull & Reich. Little work was done until the autumn of 1869, when the ore body was struck. Some ore was shipped and sold prior to the sale of the mine to the Emma Mining Company, of New York, in 1870. This company worked the mine quite vigorously, and shipped a large amount of ore. The following year the property was sold to the Emma Silver Mining Company of Utah (Limited) for $5,000,000 cash; another authority placed the price at $3,500,000. The mine was then worked by English managers, paid $300,000 in dividends (one authority says $1,300,000) until September, 1874, when it was attached by T. W. Park and others for an indebtedness of $300,000. It was then idle until October, 1877, when the American Emma Mining Company was incorporated and work resumed. The second ore body failed in the autumn of 1873, up to which time most of the ore had been shipped to Swansea, Wales. During the years 1873, 1874, 1878, and 1879 much low-grade ore was concentrated by jigs.
(Huntley Note: There has been a great amount of litigation between the English stockholders and T. W. Park and others, but these differences have recently been amicably adjusted.)
When the American Emma company began work it first prospected the old ore bodies, and then leased the Bay City tunnel, which was 1,700 feet long, and 90 feet below the lowest old workings of the Emma. This tunnel had been run by a Saint Louis company at a cost of $75,000, and had been abandoned in 1876. At the mouth of the tunnel are two horizontal boilers, 14 feet by 40 inches, and two Clayton No. 2-1/2 air-compressors. These force the compressed air through a 4-inch galvanized iron pipe, warranted to stand a pressure of 150 pounds, 1,800 feet, to an 8 horse-power engine over the winze, and a Knowles No. 7 pump. The pressure of air is kept at 60 pounds. About 3,500 gallons of water per hour is raised. During the census year about fourteen men were employed. The property of this company consists of the Emma, 2,400 by 100 feet, and the Cincinnati, 1,200 by 100 feet. One hundred thousand dollars was paid for the latter, but the claim having been jumped, the title is in dispute.
During the census year 773 tons were obtained by chloriders and from jigs, which sold for $55,071.54. From Mr. Charles Smith, of Salt Lake City, whose accounts included all but the first few hundred tons sold, the writer learned that the sales of ore to June 1, 1880, amounted to 27,451 tons, for which $2,637,727 44 was received. The mine had been developed below the discovery only about 500 feet vertically and 350 feet horizontally. The openings of the old workings were estimated at something less than 4,000 feet, and those of the new workings at about 700 feet.
The Swindle
(From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)
(The source for the Wikipedia article is limited to two articles in the New York Times, and includes only the most limited details. In reality, the story from multiple sources is so rich in details, both positive and negative as to be almost entertaining, 150 years later. The testimony before Congress in March and April 1876, carried on a daily basis by the Salt Lake Tribune and the New York Times, is especially interesting. A grand story of promoters and scoundrels taking advantage of enthusiastic and willing investors. All for a silver mine that, at first, made many people very rich, but later, as the character of the ore changed, dwindled like so many other mines in the Little Cottonwood district.)
The Emma Silver Mine is a currently inactive silver mine near Alta, Utah, in the United States. The mine is most noted for an attempt in 1871 by two American business promoters, including Senator William M. Stewart and James E. Lyon, to make a profit by promoting the depleted silver mine to British investors.
In the Spring of 1871, promoters Senator William M. Stewart of Nevada, and James E. Lyon from Wisconsin, attempted to sell the "worked-out" Emma Silver Mine at Alta, Utah to British investors. Lyon owned the mine along with Trenor W. Park and H. Henry Baxter at an estimated $1.5 million worth. Stewart had been sending bogus ore samples from other deposits to get people in England excited about buying out the Emma mine. Stewart claimed that the mine could be sold for $5 to 8 million in England. As a reward for Stewart's effort he was to receive a percentage of the profits from the sale of the depleted silver mine.
To get the people of England to invest, Stewart and Park got U.S. ambassador, Robert C. Schenck, a Grant appointee, to be named on the director’s list. Schenck gave his name and reputation to get English people to invest in the phony mine in exchange for shares in the company. Many British speculators invested millions of pounds in the exhausted mine. Secretary of State Hamilton Fish and Grant discovered the indiscretion and advised Schenck on November 21, 1871 to drop his name from the mine. Schenck did so on December 6, however he delayed severing his name with the mine until January 12, 1872, time enough for himself and other investors to sell their shares at a profit. The mine was sold to English investors for a sum of $5 million. The scandal was exposed by a U.S. Congressional investigation in 1876 led by the Democratic Party. Schenck was reprimanded by the House investigation committee, but not charged with any crimes.
Discovery
(Note of Caution: Many of the early histories were based on published accounts of the history of the Emma mine, dated in the 1874-1876 period, and there are many since then with numerous newspaper stories as the source. These accounts of this 1874-1876 period were almost always based on the comments and writings of James Lyon, who was promoting his claimed interest in the mine, including a history of the mine in which he was a major player. The investigations of 1876 found that he had very little claim to ownership in the mine, other than his own version of the story. The most detailed Lyon version was published by the New York Nation newspaper, and was dutifully picked up and published by the Mining and Scientific Press, a well-known and well-established national publication. Interested readers should avoid any source in which Lyon plays a part.)
August 28, 1865
"In his bill of complaint [in Nov. 1870] and accompanying affidavit, the plaintiff [James Lyon] alleges, that the said claims were located and recorded August 28th, 1865, by Silas Brain, now deceased, and one D. C. Nichols; the Discovery Claim and Number One having been located by the said Silas Brain, and Number Two by the said Nichols, who were the locators of said claims, and first possessed and occupied the same; and they, by said discovery, location, and possession, became lawfully possessed thereof, and acquired an indefeasible title thereto against all persons whomsoever; and their said title and right of possession become absolute, except as against the paramount title of the United States Government thereto. And that said Brain and Nichols, in locating and holding said claims, complied with all the laws, rules, customs and regulations of the said Mountain Lake Mining District." (Salt Lake Weekly Tribune, November 19, 1870; on the occasion of James Lyon's suit against James F. Woodman, et al. concerning ownership of the Emma claim)
(That D. C. Nichols was involved with Brain in 1865 is doubtful, although by September 1873 and continuing through 1874, D. C. Nichols was superintendent of the North Star mine, located less than one thousand feet from the Emma mine. He apparently left Utah in 1874, moving to Chicago, then visiting regularly, staying in and registering at hotels until August 1881.)
In November 1871, Dr. O. H. Congar related his summary of the discovery. (Salt Lake Tribune, November 17, 1871)
Mineral Review. - To The Editor, Tribune. - Seeing you prefer facts to fiction or misrepresentation in regard to mining matters, I beg to inform the correspondent of Crofutt’s Western World that he is sadly in error respecting the early history of the Little Cottonwood mines.
The facts are, Mr. Silas Brain made the first legitimate location, and drove the first stake in that canyon, in August, 1865. His first locations, while only nominally under my employ, I bought of him for seventy-five dollars, after which, he worked for a stipulated price per month and, together with others, located and secured by work sixteen lodes during that summer and fall; certificates of labor upon all of which I have now in my possession and also certified to, as being performed in that year. In the winter of 1866, in connection with the New York and Utah Prospecting and Mining Company of which I was Superintendent in securing the above mines we sold one thousand feet each of the North Star, American Eagle and the Morning Star lodes, to Mr. James P. Bruner of Philadelphia, partly on condition that I would act as his general superintendent, to develop the same during the following summer, Dr. Davids having the immediate supervision, of constructing furnaces, working, etc. All of which proved a failure on his part, but not to have it said or rather confirmed that there were no mines in that locality of any account, I erected a small blast furnace and produced three thousand pounds of silver-lead or crude bullion within two weeks from the laying of the first brick, and sold a part of said bullion to Mr. Sharkey of this city, for eighty cents per pound as lead, although it was worth three hundred dollars in silver to the ton. This was in the month of September, 1866. Now in regard to the jumpers or relocators: Those who inaugurated this in that locality were under my employ during the year 1865, and obtained their information of me in regard to the immense outcropping of argentiferous galena on the North Star, and where they put down what is now called the old Emma shaft. They went up over my road, and also were enabled thereby to obtain all of their supplies easily, comparatively speaking. That road I constructed in 1866, two years before this jumping commenced.
To all who wish to investigate the subject further, I would call their attention to the old mining records -- by-laws under which we located and worked at that time, and to my printed reports during 1864, 1865, 1866, 1867, especially referring to that locality. The above can be fully substantiated, not only by the mining records and a large amount of other documentary evidence, but also by dozens of living and reliable witnesses.
Permit me to add still farther, for the public good, as but few persons probably are aware, that the by-laws at that time allowed a claim to embrace a width of five hundred feet on each side of a lode, and in length forty-two hundred feet, but was amended in May, 1866, making changes in regard to width and labor to be performed. -- Respectfully, Dr. O. H. Congar.
(This issue of Crofutt's Western World was, in fact, the first issue of this monthly publication, published on November 1, 1871. Research has not yet found digital editions of this publication.)
(Strangely, the New York and Utah Prospecting and Mining Company does not appear in any of the three sources for national or international online newspapers, other than this singular account by O. H. Congar. Nor does it appear in any general internet search, other than the single auction sale of a share of the company stock. More research is needed.)
(Read more about Dr. O. H. Congar and his involvement with the mines in Little Cottonwood Canyon)
Murphy's "Mineral Resources of Utah" published in 1872 reported these early claims as follows.
The earliest records of mining claims in this now important camp, are those of the Pittsburgh, St. Lewis, North Star, Atlantic Cable, General Grant, Ohio, Mount Pleasant, Great Eastern, Great Western, Chicago, Morning and Evening Star, located by one Silas Brain, in August, 1865; and the Susquehanna and Shenandoah, located at the same time by H. Poole, both locators acting under Dr. O. H. Congar, agent for the New York and Utah Prospecting and Mining Company.
Dr. Congar, for his company, was the first to undertake the opening of a road towards the locality of the mines, which he completed to Gerard's Saw Mill, the present site of Central City; he also built smelting works on a small scale, to test the ores, in the summer of 1866. The Doctor, however, was obliged to suspend operations, owing to high freights, and await the completion of the trans-continental railroad.
The next earliest locations were those of the Monitor and Magnet, August 18th, 1868, and Western Star, October 23d, 1868.
The Emma mine was located in December, 1868, although not recorded until June 10th, 1869.
1868-1871
"In 1868 Woodman and [Capt J. M.] Day returned to Salt Lake. It was in the same year that they located the great Emma silver mine at Alta, which made them independently wealthy. Col. Woodman disposed of his third interest in the property to Warren Hussey of Salt Lake in 1871 and devoted some time to travel, going first to California." (Salt Lake Tribune, March 16, 1902, on the occasion of the death of James F. Woodman at age 79)
(Woodman and Day had been partners on a failed mine in Nevada. Woodman later related that the partners had returned to Utah to seek new mining claims, based on the activity taking place in the canyons surrounding Salt Lake City.)
(Read more about James F. Woodman)
(According to Robert Chisholm, it was he and Woodman who returned from Nevada and discovered the original claim, based on Silas Brain's discovery of the nearby North Star in 1865. Day and Smith were already prospecting in Little Cottonwood canyon in spring and summer 1869, and became financially involved when, with the younger Chisholm and Woodman out of money, Smith and Day paid the wages of the men contracted to dig the original shaft. In return for their financial involvement, Smith and Day received an interest in the mine when it was recorded.)
(The younger Chisholm mentioned above was William W. Chisholm, Robert B. Chisholm's son)
February 25, 1870
James F. Woodman recorded his claim in Little Cottonwood Canyon that would later become the Emma mine. (Utah Mining Gazette, October 18, 1873)
(In December 1869 the claim was surveyed, and in February 1870 the Emma claim was recorded. Chisholm and Woodman each owned one-third, each with 800 feet of the partnership's 2400 feet. Smith and Day each owned one-sixth, each with 400 feet of the partnership's 2400 feet. The other 600 feet of the group's 3000 feet of claim was held by Woodhull and others.)
(The original claim was part of the Mountain Lake Mining District, which had been organized on July 20, 1864 and encompassing all of the western slopes of the Wasatch range from Parley's Creek, south to the Provo River. The new Mountain Lake district was within the limits of the Wasatch Mountain Mining District. -- Daily Union Vedette, July 22, 1864)
(The Wasatch Mountain Mining District was organized on November 18, 1863. -- Daily Union Vedette, April 4, 1864)
(In June 1870 the Mountain Lake district was split into the Big Cottonwood Mining District and the Little Cottonwood Mining District. The Utah Mining Gazette of August 30, 1973 reported that the Mountain Lake Mining District was organized as such in 1866, and continued so until August 15th, 1868, when it was called the Little Cottonwood Mining District. This is another example of the confusion of dates for almost all the mines in Little Cottonwood before 1870.)
July 1870
"The largest mine at Little Cottonwood is the Emma ledge, located in August, 1868, and owned by the Walker Bros., J. F. Woodman and others. In July [1870], thirty-one car-loads of ore were shipped from the ledge, and that month upwards of $3,000 were paid for hauling. The cost of transportation (by team to Salt Lake City and thence by rail) to New Jersey and the expenses of treatment amount to $90 per ton, but the ore sent averages, I am told, nearly $200 per ton. There are twenty men employed here extracting the rock, of which some fifteen tons are obtained daily. A tunnel is being run in to tap the main shaft, which is down about two hundred feet." (Engineering and Mining Journal, November 1, 1870, page 277)
(These carloads of ore from the Emma mine, were among the first ore shipments made by rail from Salt Lake City.)
July 9, 1870
"Can it be possible that the Emma mine, whose teams daily file down our streets freighted with tons of rich ore, whose disbursements add fifteen thousand dollars monthly to the circulation, in the way of wages and freight alone, not counting the liberal personal disbursements of its owners..." (Deseret News, July 9, 1870)
September 8, 1870
"Little Cottonwood Canyon, situated in the Mountain Lake Mining District, is 25 miles southeast of Salt Lake City. In this canyon is situated the Emma mine, owned by Mr. Woodman, Messrs. Walker Brothers, and others. This mine was discovered and prospected by Mr. Woodman, under great difficulties, through want of means. At a depth of about 127 feet, he struck a very large deposit of ore, that, he has since proven, is over 38 feet in thickness, as he has already excavated a tunnel that length, without discovering any wall-rocks. He has also sunk s shaft into this bed of ore to the depth of 37 feet, without finding a bottom to it. Messrs. Walker Brothers, of Salt Lake City, shipped of ore from this mine 31 car-loads during the month of August, at an average clear profit of $1,200 in currency per carload. Twenty carloads of ore from this mine passed through Omaha last week, on its way to Swansea, Wales, for reduction. There are now twenty other mineral lodes in Little Cottonwood Canyon, from which shipments of ore are being made, beside that already spoken of. Much of this ore is equal, and some of it superior, in quality, to that taken out of the Emma mine." (Chicago Tribune, September 8, 1870; Letter to the Editor, by Eli B. Kelsey) (Repeated word-for-word in Salt Lake Weekly Tribune, October 22, 1870)
October 14, 1870
The multiple owners of the "Emma Silver Mining Company" gave legal notice and claimed an area of 2400 feet by 100 feet on the Emma Lode, being a silver bearing vein of rock in place. The multiple owners included the four Walker brothers (J. Robinson Walker, Samuel S. Walker, Matthew H. Walker and David F. Walker), all of Salt Lake City, along with William W. Chisholm, and J. F. Woodman of Little Cottonwood. (Salt Lake Weekly Tribune, October 22, 1870; continued weekly for the next 10 weeks)
(Read more about William W. Chisolm, son of Robert B. Chisholm)
On the same day, the owners of the "Emma Lode" organized themselves as the Emma Silver Mining Company, and applied for a U. S. government patent on their Emma mining claim. (Salt Lake Weekly Tribune, January 11, 1873)
(James Wall was the second Recorder of the mining district, and his narrative from 1876 went against the statements of Woodman and others, who Wall stated had jumped the original claims that he and others had established in 1865. But the reality was that they failed to properly mark their claims with any type of permanent marker, and failed to ensure that their claims had been properly recorded. This last point became moot because the original books were burned in a fire, or lost under mysterious circumstances.)
(Read James Wall's 1876 account of the history of the Emma mine)
October 18, 1870
"An important mining case has been pending for some time, in which James E. Lyon is the plaintiff and J. F. Woodman and others defendants. The case involves the right of possession of the Emma silver lode, in Little Cottonwood Canyon. The plaintiff [Lyon] applied to the court for an injunction to stop the defendants [Walker, et al.] from working the Emma until the suit now pending was settled. The injunction was granted by Judge McKean, but, for some reason, he afterwards removed it. The counsel of the plaintiff is arguing for its removal. The suit involves half a million dollars." (Deseret News, October 18, 1870)
(The above court action was to dissolve an injunction requested by Lyon that restrained the Walkers and Woodman from working their mining claim. The injunction had been granted without notifying them, and the above action dissolved the injunction.)
(In a classic case of claim jumping by law suit, in August 1870 James Lyon purchased the three abandoned claims first located by Silas Brain and D. C. Nichols in 1865, on a parcel of land that he said later became the North Star mine. He filed his suit to gain his possession upon learning of the rich silver strike by Chisholm and Woodman. Woodman claimed that the Emma strike he had first discovered in 1868 was about 50 feet from the Lyon claims, and that he himself had made the first discovery and made the location of the Emma lode.)
(Plus the fact that James Bruner was referenced as being owner of the North Star as early as July 1870, which suggests that Bruner bought the North Star from the Brain estate, which had entered probate on January 21, 1869.)
November 19, 1870
The Third District Court denied an injunction to stop Woodman and the Walkers from working the so-called Emma claim. The injunction had been requested by James E. Lyon on the grounds that he was the owner of the claim. In its opinion the court addressed the facts as presented by the plaintiff (Lyon) and the defendants (Woodman and the Walkers). The court found numerous invalid facts in Lyon's evidence, including his statement that the Woodman and the Walkers were working a claim that he had owned since 1868, when in fact he was not the recorded owner of his claim (the "Susquehanna") until August 1870. Also that the claim being worked by Woodman and the Walkers was actually a different, although adjacent claim (the "Emma"). (Salt Lake Weekly Tribune, November 19, 1870)
(Read the clipping of the Salt Lake Weekly Tribune for November 19, 1870)
(In a letter to the U. S. Congress in March 1876, concerning testimony of James Lyon, Judge McKean wrote that Lyon had attempted to bribe him to obtain the injunction, in the amount of $100,000, and also that all of Lyon's statements were false, charging that McKean was corrupt and untrustworthy because he owned stocks in mining companies. -- New York Times, March 9, 1876)
Sale To Eastern Capitalists (1871)
January 18, 1871
"Chicago, 19. - The Emma silver mine which was sold yesterday to the Bank of California, for one million, two hundred thousand dollars, was principally owned by a family named Chisholm at Elgin. The family, two years ago were in poor circumstances. One of them was a printer, who left his case in the Evening Post office, only three months ago." (Ogden Semi-Weekly Junction, January 21, 1871)
January 19, 1871
"Salt Lake City, Jan. 19. - A sale of three-fourths of the famous Anna (sic: Emma) silver mines in the Little Cottonwood canyon, has just been made to W. B. Lent and other capitalists, of San Francisco, for $900,000 gold. The remaining fourth of the mine is still owned by Mr. Warren Hussey, of this place, who declines selling. Much interest is manifested in the sale, it being the first really important investment made by outsiders in the mines of Utah." (Buffalo Daily Republic, January 20, 1871)
February 1, 1871
"Mr. Warren Hussey has been offered $420,000 for his fourth interest in the Emma lode, but declines to take it, as a property that gives a net income of $50,000 per month is good enough to keep." (Cheyenne Daily Leader, February 1, 1871)
Woodman sold a one-fourth interest in the Emma mine to Warren Hussey for $110,000 "in U. S. gold coin." (San Francisco Chronicle, February 4, 1871, citing the Salt Lake Herald of February 1st)
(Woodman's sale to Hussey was reported in several contemporary sources as being the first deed transfer for a mine in Utah.)
The Emma mine was producing 75 tons per day, with net prices being $100 per ton. Warren Hussey bought his one-fourth interest in January 1871 "not two months ago". The Walker Brothers bought their three-fourths interest in the mine in June 1870, paying just $30,000, and they just sold their interest for $900,000. (Chicago Tribune, February 6, 1871)
"The Terre Haute Express Says: Warren Hussey, brother of Preston Hussey, of this city, owns a one-fourth interest in a silver ledge or lode in the Little Cottonwood Silver Mines, Utah, for which he has recently been offered $400,000. The reason he did not take this princely offer is because it realizes him $1,000 a week, clear of expenses." (Lafayette (Indiana) Daily Courier, March 17, 1871)
Then, a week later in their on March 24, 1871 issue, the same Lafayette newspaper ran a correction that Hussey was netting $10,000 a week, not $1000.
March 31, 1871
The following comes from the March 31, 1871 issue of the Salt Lake Herald.
Sale Of The Emma Silver Mine. - Price $1,500,000. - Mr. James M. Day, of this city [Galena, Illinois], one of the fortunate owners of the famous Emma Silver Mine, received a dispatch to-day from Mr. Chisholm, one of the partners, stating that a sale of the mine had been effected for $1,500,000. The purchaser is Mr. Ten Eyck, of New York, who has been somewhat famous as the owner of several fast horses.
We stated some two months ago that the mine had been sold for $1,200,000. This was correct; but the purchaser, Mr. Lent of San Francisco, failed to raise the necessary funds, and the property was not transferred. It was fortunate for the owners that the sale was not consummated, for they have since taken out vast quantities of ore, which employed whole trains of cars in its transportation to New York, and they now sell it for $300,000 more than the figures then agreed upon.
The lucky owners of this mine are as follows: Warren Hussey, a banker of Salt Lake City, one-fourth; Robert B. Chisholm, of Elgin, Ills., formerly a printer in Chicago, one-fourth: James M. Day, of Galena, one-eighth; four Walker brothers, Salt Lake merchants, [one-fourth split four ways; one-sixteenth each]; Captain James Smith, of Salt Lake City, formerly of Chicago, a little less than one-sixteenth; Mrs. Minerva Cunnington, wife of a Salt Lake merchant, one-ninetieth, and Mr. Cliff, of Salt Lake one-twenty-fourth. -- Galena, Ill., Gazette, March 15th.
(The Salt Lake Herald of April 21, 1871 noted that a Mr. Sam Ten Eyck had arrived from New York and was staying at the Salt Lake House hotel. On May 14, 1871, the same newspaper noted Sam Ten Eyck had arrived from San Francisco. There may or may not have been a connection. Later in 1871, Sam Ten Eyck applied for patents on two mining claims in the Beaver mining district in central Utah.)
(James M. Day, in his testimony given in April 1876 before the Congressional committee investigating Senator Stewart's involvement with the Emma mine, stated that he owned a one-fifteenth interest in the Emma mine from September 1868 to July 1871, which he sold on the advice of the mine superintendent because the mine was not being developed at that time. He sold his interest to Trenor W. Park for $1.5 million, with the asking price for the entire mine being $12 million. -- Deseret News, April 5, 1876)
(Warren Hussey was president of the Hussey, Dahler & Co., which became First National Bank of Utah in April 1871.)
("Warren Hussey, of Salt Lake City, brother of Preston Hussey of Terre Haute, is the wealthiest man of his age in America. He is thirty eight years old, and is worth $4,000,000." - Cairo Illinois Bulletin, October 11, 1871; similar stories was carried in several newspapers over the next three weeks.)
On some date prior to April 1871, the Emma Silver Mining Company of Utah was incorporated in Utah. (New York Daily Herald, May 12, 1877, complaint by Warren Hussey)
(At the same time, the organizers of the company transferred their interest in the Emma mining claim to the company. -- Salt Lake Weekly Tribune, January 11, 1873)
April 26, 1871
The Emma Silver Mining Company of New York was incorporated in New York. (New York Daily Herald, May 12, 1877, complaint by Warren Hussey)
May 30, 1871
The Emma Silver Mining Company of Utah conveyed its property to the Emma Silver Mining Company of New York.
(Salt Lake Weekly Tribune, January 11, 1873)
(Warren Hussey, Robert Chisholm and the Walker brothers were majority owners of the Emma Silver Mining Company of Utah.)
July 15, 1871
The Third District Court handed down a decision stating that its rule for selecting a jury was proper, and was the same as the rule used by all courts within the U. S. justice system, and had been tested many times, up to and including the U. S. Supreme Court. The decision was in answer to James F. Lyons' motion for a new rule in jury selection.
(Salt Lake Tribune, July 17, 1871)
(This was in answer to a claim of improper jury selection in the original legal action by Lyon in October 1870, to take ownership of the Emma claim, which was decided against him by a jury trial.)
August 24, 1871
The U. S. Government granted the patent to the Emma Silver Mining Company of Utah. (Salt Lake Weekly Tribune, January 11, 1873)
(On various dates in September and October 1871, the owners of the Emma Lode mining patent conveyed the patent to the Emma Silver Mining Company of New York. -- Salt Lake Weekly Tribune, January 11, 1873)
Sale To English Capitalists (1871)
November 9, 1871
The Emma Silver Mining Company (Limited) published its prospectus, dated November 9, 1871, in several British newspapers across England starting on November 10th and appearing as late as November 27th. The company had not yet purchased the Emma mine.
(Read the Emma Silver Mining company's prospectus)
(In an early indication that all was not well at the very beginning, the prospectus stated "the title to it is perfect, being secured by a United States patent," when in fact, there were multiple persons claiming partial ownership.)
(Immediately there were questions of improper activity by Major General Robert Schenck, who was the U. S. Minister to the British royal court, adding his good name as a representative of the U. S. government to the scheme. Schenck was next-door neighbor to Senator Stewart and was pulled into the British scheme to add credibility. Although Schenck resigned in December 1871 at President Grant's suggestion, both he and Senator Stewart were later investigated by Congressional committees. These investigations found that Stewart was the culprit in the wild and excessive promotion of the Emma mine to the British public.)
November 13, 1871
The Emma Silver Mining Company of New York conveyed its property to the Emma Silver Mining Company of London (Limited).
(Salt Lake Weekly Tribune, January 11, 1873)
December 3, 1871
The following comes from the December 3, 1871 issue of the Salt Lake Herald.
The Emma Mine. - Rumor has it that Wm. M. Lent is now on his way from San Francisco to New York City, to make final arrangements regarding a compromise of all the titles relating to the Emma mine. Mr. Lent represents what is known as the San Francisco company, who purchased the old title of Mr. Haskin. Everything now bids fair for a final close up, in order that the stock of the great English company can be thrown on the London market. The history of this famous mine, the vast sums of money expended for various purposes connected with it, and the difficulty into which a minister plenipotentiary has got because of it, go to prove that old titles are more valuable than many people would seem to think.
By the Mining World, of London, we note that the Emma silver mining company (Limited), with a capital of one million pounds sterling, offer subscriptions for twenty-five thousand shares, half of the total amount, at twenty pounds per share. The board of directors of the company are: George Anderson, M. P.; E. Brydges Willyams, M. P.; E. Leigh Pemberton, M. P.; Percy Doyle, C. B.; and Hon. John C. Stanley, all of London; General Schenck, U. S. minister to Great Britain; Trenor W. Park, North Bennington, Vt., and Senator Stewart, of Nevada.
(Read the Wikipedia article about Trenor W. Park)
(In his testimony given in April 1876 to the Congressional committee investigating Senator Stewart's involvement with the Emma mine, William M. Lent stated that he owned an undivided half interest in the Emma mine, and he sold that half interest to Trenor W. Park and H. Henry Baxter. Lent stated that he sold his interest on the advice of a mining expert he hired to look into the mine's potential. -- Deseret News, April 5, 1876)
(Horace Henry Baxter was former president of the New York Central railroad in 186-1869, and by this time one of New York's top-level investor/speculators.) (Read the Wikipedia article about H. H. Baxter)
(Beginning in early July 1872, a court case came before the Third District Court in Utah concerning the question of boundaries, encroachment and trespass, between the Emma Silver Mining Company of London (Limited) as plaintiffs vs. the Cincinnati and Illinois Tunnel Company of Utah as defendants. The Emma company accused the Cincinnati and Illinois company of encroachment of its mineral vein, and the Cincinnati and Illinois company claimed there was a break in the vein. There were injunctions and postponements, and expert witnesses for both sides. On November 10, 1872, the jury found in favor of the Emma company, but the Cincinnati and Illinois company immediately filed an appeal. After six years, the appeal was denied and the case was returned to the Third District Court. The verdict of November 9, 1872, was restated "nunc pro tunc" on November 8, 1878 by Third District Court.)
(By July 1872, the Cincinnati and Illinois Tunnel company was already part of the Emma Hill Consolidated Mining company when it was organized in May 1872. The Emma Hill Consolidated company's property essentially surrounded the Emma mine's property.)
(The Emma Hill Consolidated Mining Co. was incorporated in Salt Lake City on May 8, 1872.)
(Note that the organizers of this Emma Hill Consolidated company included J. F. Woodman, J. M. Day, and J. W. Haskins of Vallejo, California, who had sold their interest in the Emma mine to W. M. Lent and T. W. Park less that six months prior.)
(Read more about the Emma Hill Consolidated company, and its most profitable mine, the Vallejo.)
(Throughout this period there were numerous negative comments about the incompetence of the Emma mine's management, their lack of good engineering practices and disregard for safety. There were also charges of "salting" the mine, which was planting high value ore taken from other mines with the intention of misrepresenting the quantity and quality of the ore being mined from the Emma mine.)
(During the above court case from July 1872, one of the so-called experts for the defense stated that a portion of the large cavity where ore had been extracted from of the Emma mine had caved in due to inadequate timbering with 8x8 timbers. In mid-December 1872 he was invited to tour the mine and examine the timbering in better detail. He admitted error on his part, having found that the timbers were in fact 12x12, with large portions being timbered with 14x14 timbers.)
(Read the judge's charge to the jury, dated November 1872; from the January 11, 1873 issue of the Salt Lake Weekly Tribune.)
January 1873
In his letter to fellow English stockholders of the Emma company, George Anderson, as Chairman of the Board and Member of Parliament, reported the following about the above litigation in July 1872. (Salt Lake Herald, January 11, 1873)
On my arrival at Salt Lake I found that the circumstances of our litigation were considerably changed. The Illinois tunnel company, with whom we had been litigating, had sold their tunnel, their lawsuit and all their rights and claims to a new company called "The Emma Hill Consolidated Mining Co.," formed with a nominal capital of twenty millions of dollars, and the sole object of obtaining the whole of the Emma Hill. That company had also purchased a number of claims and locations in our immediate neighborhood of little or no value in themselves, but with large possibilities of annoyance to us by frivolous litigations which might have kept us in hot water for many years. Our patent would undoubtedly have triumphed in the end, but probably only after a series of appeal and a large amount of law costs, which in America can only to a very small extent be recovered from the loser - a system which greatly favors "blackmail" suits. This change of position was certainly not in our favor. We knew that we had more powerful enemies to fight. We knew that safe as our case appeared, it was not possible to count on a unanimous jury, failing which there would be a new trial. We knew that as soon as we got our verdict, the suit was to be appealed first to the supreme Territorial court and then to the supreme court at Washington, lasting over three or four fears. We knew that one or more new suits were being prepared, which we would have the same cost in fighting, and which after equal victories would be similarly appealed. Success in this suit thus become of even greater importance than before, and no legitimate effort was spared, to secure it. The trial was much delayed, and when it did come on it lasted a week. We got our verdict, giving us the ore in dispute, with $5,000 damage, and making the injunction perpetual, and we bought the tunnel, and so precluded appeal.
The price to be paid is that we force the damages and pay the Illinois $100,000, spread over the next year in monthly installments. The amount is little more than a month's dividend, and is a very small sum compared with the property at stake, or with the law cost which might soon have been incurred in defending it.
May 27, 1874
The following comes from the May 27, 1874 issue of the Salt Lake Herald.
Salt Lake City, May 26, 1874. - Last evening I received the printed notice, sent to all shareholders, that the third ordinary general meeting of the Emma Silver Mining Company (Limited) would be held on the 15th instant. The notice was accompanied by a number of reports, one from the Chairman of the Board of Directors, one from the Board of Directors, one from the committee, and one from Mr. Atwood; with the latter were five maps, or plans, consisting of: first, a geological diary showing anticlinal fold, etc.; second transverse and horizontal sections, showing shape and size of ore deposit, etc; third, a ground plan, showing position of Emma ore deposit in reference to porphyritic dyke found in the Reliance tunnel; fourth, a vertical plan; and fifth, a map showing the water rights claimed by tho Emma Company, and flumes built, etc.
All the reports are most discouraging. Mr. E. S. Blackwell, in a report of June 7th, 1873, says: "The future of the mine depends entirely upon the virgin ground, and to explore this you must be prepared to wait some time and spend a large amount of money in developments." Mr. Clarence King, on June 11th, 1873, says: "The great Emma Bonanza is with insignificant exceptions worked out." And Mr. Andrew Murray, F.L.S., etc. (whatever that may mean), says, August 5th, 1873, "In my opinion the famous Emma mine is exhausted."
If the mine was exhausted last August, how can we account for this paragraph under the head of Finance in Mr. Atwood's report: "The net return resulting from the working of your mine from March, 1873, to March, 1874, may be considered to be at the least one hundred and thirty-one thousand dollars ($131,000), after paying all expenses, also paying numerous old debts, one of the principal of the latter being a county tax bill of $10,000." Now, Messrs. Editors, we are assured by three prominent "experts" that the Emma mine was exhausted last June and August; assuming that the mine yield was equal each month over half of the net returns ($131,000) must have been extracted since the mine was reported exhausted! How do you explain this, and what was the gross yield of the mine? Furthermore, I learn from London, that a report, sent by an expert who examined the mine as late as last month, says that there is still a large amount of ore in the upper workings, which could be profitably concentrated. This gentleman could not examine the lower workings, as they were flooded, the pumps having been stopped four days before his arrival! I herewith forward you the reports, plans, etc.; you may find some interesting matter therein. - A Registered Emma Share Holder.
September 23, 1874
"The Emma mine is closed again. Suits instituted by Trenor W. Park caused the suspension." (Ogden Junction September 23, 1874)
English Investors Sue Eastern Capitalists (1875)
February 5, 1875
"The full text of the complaint by the Emma Silver Mining company, of London, against Trenor Park, Baxter and Senator Stewart, suing for $5,000,000 damages for alleged fraudulent representations of the value of the Emma mine is published. The complaint charges willfully false statements of such value on the mendacious report of Prof. Benj. Silliman, for which the latter was to receive a fee of $5,000 with $45,000 additional contingent upon the sale of the property. Baxter is a Wall Street operator, who was associated with Stockwell in the Pacific Mail direction. Among the various specific charges of willful concealment of facts, one recites that in July or August 1871, an expert employed by the defendants reported to Park and Baxter that the ore mass in the mine would soon be found to thin down in its length and depth, and that at its then rate of extraction the mine would soon be stripped and for the present practically exhausted. Subsequently the defendants contracted with Baron Grant to pay him $1,000,000 to organize and carry out such measures as would result in the sale of the mine for $5,000,000." (Ogden Junction, February 5, 1875)
March 19, 1875
"The Emma mining company are required to give bonds in $5000 for costs in the suit against Senator Stewart, Trenor W. Park and Henry Baxter, to recover the sum of $5,000,000 paid them for the mines." (Daily Ogden Junction, March 19, 1875)
April 29, 1875
"The suit of the Emma Silver Mining company against Trenor W. Park and others, has been transferred to the United States circuit court [in Utah] on the petition of the defendants, who state that their co-defendant, Stewart, has not been served; that plaintiff is an English corporation, and that the claim in the suit is for $5,000,000." (Deseret News, April 29, 1875)
June 17, 1875
"The suit pending in the Supreme Court of this state [New York] of the Emma Silver Mining Company (Limited) of London vs. Trenor W. Park and another, was removed yesterday to the United States Circuit Court." (Brooklyn Union, June 18, 1875)
Forced Sale To Eastern Capitalists (1876)
September 8, 1876
"Emma Mine. — This celebrated mine was sold at noon to-day, by the U. S. Marshal, to satisfy the judgments obtained, in the Third District Court of this Territory [Utah Territory], by the New York Loan and Indemnity Company, and Trenor W. Park against the Emma Silver Mining Company limited. The purchaser is Charles G. Lincoln and the sum bid for the property was $144,194.24, that being the amount of the judgments and costs. It is reported that after the time allowed for redemption has elapsed, work will be resumed upon the mine by Trenor W. Park, the purchase by Mr. Lincoln being on behalf of that gentleman. The suits against the Emma Company, upon which the aforesaid judgments were obtained, were allowed, by the defendants, to go by default." (Deseret Evening News, September 8, 1876) (Later reports show that Charles G. Lincoln was the head cashier in Park's Vermont bank, and had been an associate of Park since the 1864 organization of the bank.)
(This indicates that the English owners let the ownership of the Emma mine go to whoever the buyer was. "To go by default" in legal terms means that the defendants, in this case the English owners, did not respond to the lawsuit, or appear in court to defend their ownership. Some comments in the press in late 1880 say that the 1876 suit was over the ownership of the mine itself. But reading the various reports on both sides of the Atlantic, the suit was for $5 million in damages. This indicates that the current English shareholders and directors wanted the $5 million of the original purchase to be refunded, and that they had lost interest in the mine itself.)
(The New York Loan and Indemnity company went into default and receivership in December 1876 due in part to the losses it suffered as part of the Emma mine case, along with other "fast" speculative investments. Trenor W. Park, a Vermont banker, was also party to these same investments. New York Loan and Indemnity company, having closed as a business in February 1875, was dissolved as a corporation in April 1877. New York Loan and Indemnity had been organized and began doing business in February 1873, with offices on Broadway in New York City.)
English Capitalists Sue Eastern Capitalists
First Suit (1876)
December 13, 1876
"The Emma Silver Mine Again. -- The suit involving the alleged fraudulent transaction connected with the celebrated Emma Silver Mine came on for trial yesterday in the United States Circuit Court, before Judge Wallace and a jury. The title of the suit is "The Emma Silver Mining Company, limited, of London, against Trenor W. Park, H. Henry Baxter and William M. Stewart." Gen. Schenck was in court." (Cleveland Plain Dealer, December 14, 1876)
December 13, 1876
"New York, 13. - The case of the Emma Silver Mining Company (Limited) of London vs. Trenor W. Park, H. Henry Baxter and Win. M. Stewart, to recover $5,000,000, was up for trial this afternoon before Judge Wallace in the United States circuit court [U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York]. The plaintiff is a corporation created in November, 1871, and is now existing under the laws of Great Britain. On February 13th, 1871, Jas F. Day, Jesse Smith, Warren Hussey, Francis D. Cliff, Joseph R. Walker, M. H. Walker, Samuel S. Walker, David F. Walker, Robert B. Chisholm, M. M. Cunnington and John Cunnington claimed that they owned the Emma mine, Utah. On the same day Trenor W. Park purchased a half interest in the property. Plaintiff believes that Baxter & Stewart were interested with Park, and that the nominal price Park was to pay for the half interest was $750,000, but that only $375,000 was paid; that at the time Park and his associates became interested in the mine it was almost worked out. The ore then remaining in the mine did not exceed in value $250,000. Defendant organized in April under the laws of the state of New York the Emma Silver Mining company with a nominal capital of $5,000,000, divided into 50,000 shares and distributed among defendants and the original owners. They then put men to work at the mine, and in September went to London to sell the mine. They procured the services of Albert Grant, and sold the mine to plaintiffs, for £1,000.000 sterling, or about $5,000,000 in United States money. Plaintiffs [the English company] charge that Professor Benj. Silliman of New Haven, Conn., made a false report of the condition of the mine, by being bribed by defendants. They also claim that the mine and its effects were not worth more than $750,000. The case will probably occupy the attention of the court for weeks." (Salt Lake Herald, December 14, 1876; including over 50 news stories across the nation, all with almost identical wording.)
(In opening arguments, the plaintiffs' lawyers stated the defendants in their capacity as the directors of the Emma Silver Mining Company of New York had fraudulently taken ownership of the mine through distribution of shares of the New York company to the previous owners [Hussey, Chisholm, and the Walkers]. The defendants then offered ownership of the mine to the newly organized English company, Emma Silver Mining Company, limited.)
(In the opening arguments, the defendants' lawyers stated that the suit for the so-called fraudulent sale could only be brought by the original shareholders and directors, as required by English law, not by the current shareholders or the current company itself, five years after the sale. All parties agreed that none of the original shareholders or directors were currently involved with or part of the English company. Over the interim five years, the "originals" had all disposed of their shares on the London stock market, at greatly reduced prices. Three of the "originals" had also declared personal bankruptcy to protect themselves from the law suits of numerous minority shareholders. As evidence of the defendants' case that the suit should be dismissed was that none of the officers and directors of the current English company were part of the original prospectus, which was presented. This was the evidence that apparently swayed the jury in the defendants favor.)
February 19, 1877
At a special shareholders meeting held in London on February 19th, the chairman stated "For the last two years the company had existed not as a mining company, but as a 'lawing' company. The only property they possessed or had possessed for two years was a lawsuit; they were dead as a mining company two years ago, when Park seized the mine." "The company was started in 1871, and by the statute of limitations all possible remedies ceased during the present year." Any future action was "now or never." The shareholders voted to fund a continuation of the legal processes. (Bristol England Western Daily Press, February 21, 1877)
April 28, 1877
The jury in the trial of
Emma Silver Mining Company (Limited) of London vs. Trenor W. Park, H. Henry Baxter and Win. M. Stewart found in favor of the defense (Park, Baxter and Stewart). The next stage will be an appeal to the U. S. Supreme Court. (Buffalo Sunday Morning News, April 28, 1877, "this afternoon")
(It was during these legal proceedings in New York that Warren Hussey and Robert Chisholm found out details of the 1871 sale to the English company. Hussey and Chisholm were upset to find out that they had sold their shares in the New York company to Park for $50, currency, while Park sold the shares to the English company for $117, gold. The complaints asked that all sales of the shares of the New York company to the English company be declared null and void.)
May 12, 1877
Warren Hussey and Robert Chisholm both filed separate law suits in New York, against Park, Baxter and Stewart, for fraud and misrepresentation in the sale of the Emma Silver Mining Company of New York, of which they were shareholders, to the Emma Silver Mining Company of London (Limited). The fraud and misrepresentations were spelled out as a complex series of transactions involving shares and cash in exchange for them releasing their shares in the New York company to Park, Baxter and Stewart for sale to the English company. This activity was in late November and early December 1871, with all parties being in London at the time as negotiations with the English company were taking place. There was also the confusion of James Lyon of Wisconsin, and William Lent of San Francisco also being in London and demanding either money or shares in the English company in return for them quieting theirs claims of ownership in the Emma mine. (New York Daily Herald, May 12, 1877, in which the complaints are spelled out in detail)
November 21, 1877
"New Mining Company. - We understand that Mr. Trenor W. Park and associates recently organized, in New York, a new mining company in connection with the celebrated Emma mine. The association is called the American Emma Silver Mining Company. It is their intention to commence active work within a few weeks." (Deseret News, November 21, 1877)
(Research among the various newspapers in Great Britain found numerous law suits for and against the Emma Silver Mining Company (Limited) pending in the British courts dating from 1878 onward, apparently starting in February 1878 as reported in the Glasgow Herald. The company was suing various persons that were among the "promoters" of the enterprise dating from the 1871 period, including its directors at the time, claiming either conspiracy or negligence, or both. In each case, the person or persons being sued claimed personal bankruptcy, and therefore no assets to be had to pay damages. On the opposite side of the situation, the Emma company was sued by various persons and companies, to recover profits in the sale of metals, or profits from the sale of shares in the company. In each case, the company claimed no assets, and therefore it was unable to pay any of the claims. In each case, it was clear that the mine itself was no longer in the hands of the British company, having defaulted in the New York court case and the resulting U. S. Marshal's sale of September 1876, but the several court cases was providing plenty of business for the lawyers.)
March 1, 1878
"In the United States Court at New York, Saturday, Judge Wallace handed down his decision in the motion for a new trial in the Emma Silver Mining Company (Limited) against Trenor W. Park and H. Henry Baxter. The action was brought by the plaintiffs to recover $5,000,000, and the jury returned a verdict for the defendants [Park and Baxter, with the result that they did not have to pay the $5 million]. The motion for a new trial was denied." (Westchester Pennsylvania Daily Local News, March 4, 1878)
(The arguments had been heard on November 17, 1877, but Judge Wallace took until March 1, 1878 to hand down his decision. -- London Times, March 22, 1878)
April 8, 1878
"It is stated that the action taken by Mr. George Anderson, M. P., in lodging a petition in the London Bankruptcy Court for liquidation simply arises from the fact that between 200 and 300 actions are threatened against him in his capacity as the original chairman and as a director of the Emma Silver Mining Company, and that as it would be ruinous to defend them, Mr. Anderson has, on the advice of friends, taken the necessary steps to have his affairs settled by liquidation." (Greenock Telegraph and Clyde Shipping Gazette, April 8, 1878)
February 9, 1879
"Judgment was entered yesterday in the United States Circuit Court for $2,998.73 for the defendants [Park and Baxter] for costs as taxed in the suit of Emma Silver Mining Company, limited, against Trenor W. Park and others. This suit was begun December 17, 1876, and after a long trial concluded April 28, 1877, in a verdict for the defendants. A bill of exceptions has been settled and filed, and the case will now go to the United States Supreme Court." (New York Daily Herald, February 9, 1879)
March 14, 1879
The Emma Silver Mining company of London had sued the promoters of the 1871 sale in the English courts. In March 1879 the Emma company (of London) won the case against the English promoter, Baron Albert Grant, and was awarded $700,000 in damages, but Baron Grant had declared bankruptcy. The Emma company's suits for damages against the American promoters, General Baxter, Trenor W. Park, General Schenck, W. M. Stewart and others, were still pending. (Salt Lake Herald, March 14, 1879)
July 13, 1879
"The Emma. - A great interest is still felt in relation to the Emma, that most abused of Utah mines. The Utah Commercial for July has the following to say upon the subject: Mr. Charles Smith, of Salt Lake City, has kept the books of the Emma mine since ever it was worked, and from him we have procured the following statement of its product. Soon after it was discovered by Mr. Woodman the Walker Bros. bought in, and it was called The Emma Mining Company. This organization sold 1315 tons of ore in San Francisco, realizing net, $126,602.33. Subsequently Warren Hussey bought in and it became The Emma Silver Mining Company of Utah. This organization sold 4278 tons of ore in New York, realizing, net, $810,895.12. In November, 1871, the properly want into the hands of the English Company, and they took out from that time to Jan. 1st, 1879, 21,058 tons, which realized, net, in Salt Lake City, $1,743,911.18. Total tons, 26,651; total realized, $2,581,408.63. Probably the cost of taking out was not more than ten or fifteen per cent. A more profitable mine, while it lasted, was scarcely ever found." (Ogden Junction, July 13, 1879)
(Even with a cost of "taking out" the ore of 15 percent, the owners still made $2,194,196 profit over 8-1/2 years, or $258,140 per year, or $21,511 per month, on average. Doesn't seem like a "failed" or "exhausted" mine, does it.)
September 27, 1879
"The Emma - Crossing the canyon, at the foot of the great mineral belt lying within dolomite lime, is the famous Emma mine, which scalped Johnny Bull, winged Schenck, blacked Alta’s eye and threw a cloud of suspicion over the entire Territory for several years. It went up like a rocket and came down like a stick; it produced its millions, sold for millions, and laid in obscurity till finally resurrected under the name of the American Emma. Under American management, it is again a producing mine, and may, when more properly developed, take its old rank among the first mines in the world. Superintendent Charley Reed is engaged in taking down the buildings and machinery and transferring them to the mouth of the Bay City Tunnel. He will sink in the drift and connect the tunnel with the old workings of the Emma. The machinery consists of two fifty-horse power engines and boilers, air compressor, pumps and other first-class appliances. Contracts have been made for wood, a large force will be engaged, and every arrangement made for pushing the work with vigor." (Salt Lake Weekly Tribune, September 27, 1879)
("Johnny Bull" was slang for an Englishman, similar to "Johnny Reb" for a soldier of the Southern states.)
(The Bay City Tunnel was located about 100 feet below the Emma mine, and was started in August 1873 with hopes to cut a similar vein to that which the Emma mine was taking out. In February 1876, after driving the tunnel 1800 feet into the mountain, the Bay City company cut into the Emma vein, which the Emma company immediately claimed under the newly established apex law. After that, the Bay City Tunnel was abandoned, having exposed what was established as the Emma vein and thereby losing access to any ore of its own. By December 1879, the Emma company had leased (and later purchased) the Bay City Tunnel, and was moving all of the machinery from the Emma's original tunnel, down to the Bay City tunnel. From then on, the Emma claim was worked from the Bay City Tunnel.)
September 27, 1879
"Emma Concentrator - In connection with the Emma mine may properly be introduced the Concentrator, an invention of Mr. Longmaid, who has a sub-lease from Mr. Scrimgeur to work over the old Emma dump. At present he is engaged in concentrating a dump which had been previously run through once or twice by another process, and succeeding admirably. Up to the 18th inst. 300 tons had been concentrated, producing first-class ore assaying 82 ounces silver and 46 per cent lead, and second-class assaying 40 ounces silver and 50 per cent lead. In a run of seven weeks, with the aid of this new invention, over $20,000 was cleaned up. There is at least 1,500 tons on this waste dump ready for working, independent of the large dump at the mine, to which a wagon road is being constructed from the concentrator. With the present facilities 80 tons per day are run through. The works are a combination of sluices, jiggers and revolving table, simple in construction and powerful in execution. Twenty-five men are employed in twelve hour shifts." (Salt Lake Weekly Tribune, September 27, 1879)
Second Suit (1880)
May 25, 1880
The Emma Silver Mining Company of London (Limited) sued the American Emma Silver Mining Company of New York in United States Circuit Court [United States District Court for the Southern District of New York], to have the sale of the Emma mine rescinded. The defendants (the New York company) "pleaded on bar to the bill of complaint," pleading "that the question involved in this suit had been fully adjudicated in former action." (Salt Lake Herald, May 25, 1880)
(On September 30, 1880, Judge Choate of the Southern District of New York overruled the pleas of the defendants, allowing the case to move forward. -- New York Times, October 1, 1880, "yesterday")
(The previous litigation from 1876-1878 had allowed only the original prospectus as evidence by the defendants as to their original offering the sale of the Emma mine to English investors, with only positive reports from experts. This second litigation allowed much more damning evidence from the period in the subsequent six months after the sale in late 1871, as to the incomplete nature of the offering made to prospective buyers of the stock of the English company.)
September 22, 1880
There were rumors that a settlement of the Emma mine litigations was coming very soon. Trenor W. Park was reported as offering cash and guarantees in order for the English company to withdraw its litigation. He was to furnish approximately $120,000 in working capital. Park was also to furnish approximately $97,000 as a bonus to the English shareholders, with the guarantee that they would not be subject to any future assessments. (Western Mining Gazetteer, September 22, 1880)
November 11, 1880
Trenor W. Park received word "three weeks ago" that the English shareholders of the Emma Silver Mining Company of London were willing to accept a settlement. Park then sent an agent to London to begin negotiations. Park stated that he had purchased the Emma mine in 1878 for $350,000, and that he had always been willing to accept any settlement in which he recovered his costs. He was willing to accept any settlement that might include mortgages, stock, or equivalent security. Park received a cable on November 10 saying the settlement had been reached and that the litigation would be withdrawn. (Daily Ogden Junction, November 11, 1880)
January 15, 1881
New York., Jan. 15. - The Emma mine litigations and controversies between the English stockholders of the Emma Company and Baron Grant, of England and Trenor W. Park, of New York City, and H. H. Baxter, of Vermont, have all been amicably adjusted. The American parties agreed to take shares in the new company, yet to be formed. Park alone was to receive about 16 percent of the shares of the new company, in return for which he was to furnish approximately $120,000 in working capital. Park was also to furnish approximately $97,000 as a bonus to the English shareholders, with the guarantee that they would not be subject to any future assessments. The American parties also guaranteed that the Emma mine's vein was a true fissure vein and that the mine is doing well. (Salt Lake Herald, January 18, 1881)
June 8, 1882
Judge Addison Brown of the Southern District of New York allowed the motion to discontinue the suit between the Emma Silver Mining Company of London (Limited) and the Emma Silver Mining Company of New York. (Ogden Standard-Examiner, June 8, 1882)
(Trenor W. Park died on December 13, 1882, while aboard the ship "San Blas" between New York and Aspinwall, Panama while en route to San Francisco. He was born in 1823. He died without a will, leaving his estate in quite a mess. It was said that he died from overwork, but the official cause of death was a stroke.)
(Read the Wikipedia article about Trenor W. Park)
(H. Henry Baxter died on February 17, 1884. He was born in 1818.)
(Read the Wikipedia article about H. Henry Baxter)
After The Law Suits (1882)
February 11, 1882
The following comes from the February 11, 1882 issue of the London Daily Telegraph.
To The Editor Of The The Daily Telegraph. - Sir, We beg to inform you that the title deeds relating to the Emma Mine have been this day handed over and possession given to us on behalf of "The New Emma Silver Mining Company (Limited)." Steps will be taken as soon as possible vigorously to work the mine, for which purpose, according to the terms of settlement, a working capital of £25,500 has been subscribed. (Emma Silver Mining Company (Limited) in liquidation.)
To The Editor Of The Daily Telegraph - Sir, Will you permit me to announce that I have this day carried to completion the terms of settlement under which all litigation, whether in England or America, is finally disposed of, and, according to the terms of settlement have registered the "New Emma Silver Mining Company (Limited)," and have caused to be vested in it the Emma Mine, with a title clear of all claims and encumbrances whatsoever, as shown to the satisfaction of the company's legal advisers. - Alexander W. MacDougall, Liquidator.
February 13, 1882
"It is stated officially that terms of settlement, under which all litigation in connection with the Emma Mine, whether in England or America, is disposed of, have been carried to completion, the mine, with a title clear of all claims and encumbrances, being vested in the New Emma Silver Mining Company, Limited." (Glasgow Herald, February 13, 1882)
May 2, 1882
The first annual general meeting of the New Emma Silver Mining Company (Limited) was held in London on May 2, 1882. A letter from the company chairman was read into the record, with the chairman making a statement that the mine which the company was formed to work was in the possession of the company, with a title free from all claims and encumbrances; and they also had the satisfactory information that sufficient funds were available to work the mine for the purpose of determining whether there was, in reality, a mine there or not. There had been reports from time to time that had been so varied that it was really impossible to tell the position which the company was in. When the settlement was made with Mr. Park it was with the express understanding that there should be a thorough development of the mine. The whole of the property had been conveyed to the company. The chairman thought if the mine was properly worked there was little doubt that the New Emma Mine would turn out much better than the old company did. Mr. Hayes asked if the new company was entirely free from the old one. The chairman said it was. (London Pall Mall Gazette, May 3, 1882, "yesterday")
June 9, 1882
The shareholders of the New Emma Silver Mining Company in London agreed to purchase the adjacent Cincinnati property. The Emma and Cincinnati properties were so close to each other that there would be grounds for dispute as each develops its ore vein. Such a purchase would avoid "expensive and tedious litigation as to boundaries." (Glasgow Herald, June 10, 1882, "yesterday")
Charles Keller wrote about the Emma mine after the law suits were settled in 1882.
The American Emma company remained in existence only four years before the Emma mine was returned to the former owners in England. During that time considerable work had been done in the Bay City tunnel, but most of it was done in the manner of development. Very little, if any, ore was shipped from the tunnel, although leasers working the Emma dump and mine shipped constantly, providing royalty income for the company.
The New Emma Silver Mining Company, Limited, was formed in January 1882, a re-registration of the old Emma Silver Mining Company, Limited. It took over the Emma property as well as the Bay City tunnel, still under lease. There was an air of optimism surrounding this event; the stockholders had unjustified faith that this time they would get rich. Unfortunately that was not their destiny. For thirteen years the British tried to work the Emma mine, never making a profit. Instead of receiving big dividends, the investors found themselves called upon repeatedly for funds to keep the company afloat. During that time the company was re-registered three times - in 1886, 1890 and 1895. Part of the problem was the difficult winters in the 1880 decade, with devastating snow avalanches, first attacking Alta city, but in 1884 completely wrecking the Emma works at the Bay City tunnel.
The ever present danger effectively closed the mine during winter months. Another part of the company’s problem was expenditure of funds at the home office in London, each year contributing a sizable amount to the total loss. After twelve unsuccessful years the company’s directors decided to head in a different direction: investing in mines in Africa and Australia. They closed the Emma mine, but held it in hopes silver prices would increase and they could reopen it as a profitable venture. They did have an inexhaustible supply of optimism. This was the purpose of the 1895 reorganization. Another reorganization took place in 1900 with the intent to dispose of the American property and focus its efforts on other foreign mines. However it was not until 1908 before the mine returned to Utah interests and became the property of the newly incorporated Old Emma Mines Company. This time the transfer involved considerably more than just the Emma mine because during the years of the New Emma Silver Mining Company, Limited, and its several reorganizations, other properties had been acquired. They included the Bay City tunnel, which was purchased from the Saint Louis company in 1887, and the Illinois tunnel, Cincinnati and three claims with the uninspiring names of No. 1, No. 2 and No.3, all acquired in 1882. The British company had also acquired control of the Grizzly and Lavinia claims up in Grizzly Gulch by purchasing all but seventy shares of the capital stock of the Lavinia and Grizzly Consolidated Mining Company, then gaining title to the mines by court order after the parent company was dissolved. However, these two mines were sold in 1903 to become the basis of the Continental Alta group of the Continental Mines & Smelting Company, a big story in itself.
(Although not a great producer, and by this time only shipping second class ore that required concentration, the Emma remained as a separate company until 1908. After the 1890s, the Emma, like most of the mines in Little Cottonwood Canyon, was in the hands of a series of low-cost, low-production leasers, which was a meager source of royalty income for the English company. In the mid 1920s, the cost of transportation overshadowed the profits of all the mining companies in the canyon, and there began a series of consolidations, including the Emma, Then in 1927, the Emma came under the control of George Watson and his Alta Michigan company, which also controlled at least seven other mines in the district.)
(Read more about the Little Cottonwood mines after the 1920s)
More Information
Emma Hill Consolidated Mining Company -- Includes history of its major mine, the Vallejo, and its successor company, the Joab Lawrence Company.
Alta Historic Marker
"Historic Bay City Tunnel -- Behind this building lies the Bay City tunnel of the Emma mine. In 1873 the Emma received international attention when its silver-bearing vein faulted and British investors accused mine managers of fraud. British Parliament discussed war, and President Grant's administration scrambled to heal wounds. At the turn of the century the Bay City tunnel was used to access the elusive ore vein. The Emma closed in 1918 having produced close to $4 million in silver ore. Today the tunnel leads to the source of the town of Alta’s culinary water supply."
###