6.  Newly  discovered  evidence  as  a  ground  for  a  motion  for  new  trial
must  be  evidence  discovered  after  the  trial  which  is  material  and  which


590  Roberts  bt  al.  v.  Oechsli  et  al.      [Mar.  T.  '18

the  moving  party  could  not  with  reasonable  diligence  have  discovered
and  produced  at  the  trial,  it  being  incumbent  on  such  party  to  disclose
by  his  own  affidavit  that  the  new  evidence  was  not  known  to  him  at  the
tune  of  the  trial.
Appeals  from  District  Court,  Silver  Bow  County;  J.  J.  Lynch,
Judge.
Action  by  E.  A.  Roberts  and  D.  M.  Morgan  against  George
Oechsli,  P.  A.  Comer  and  E.  F  Mayer.  Judgment  for  plaintiffs
and  defendants  appeal  from  it  and  from  an  order  denying  their
motion  for  a  new  trial.    Affirmed.
Mr.  William  Meyer,  for  Appellants,  submitted  a  brief  and
argued  the  cause  orally.
Mr.  J.  E.  Healy,  for  Respondents,  submitted  a  brief,  and
argued  the  cause  orally.
MB.  JUSTICE  HOLLOWAY  delivered  the  opinion  of  the
court.
Defendants  made  application  for  patent  for  the  Hugo  quartz
lode  mining  claim,  and  plaintiffs  adversed  and  brought  this
action  to  have  determined  the  relative  rights  of  the  parties  to
portions  of  the  ground  claimed  by  each.  Prom  a  judgment  in
favor  of  plaintiffs  and  from  an  order  denying  a  new  trial  de-
fendants appealed.
L  Complaint  is  made  that  the  court  unduly  restricted  the
cross-examination  of  one  of  the  plaintiffs,  but  the  record  dis-
closes that  the  widest  latitude  was  allowed  in  the  cross-examina-
tion of  all  the  witnesses.
