notice of location.

 We do not mean to hold that such diligent prosecution of the work may not include such actual prepnratlon for the same as the bringing to the claim of the materials necessary therefor. We have no such situation presented by the evidence here, and need not determine exactly what will constitute the diligent prosecution of discovery work. Here we have nothing more than an indefinite figuring with other persons as to what they will charge for doing the work, If empRalph Lauren Outlet loyed to do so, which by no stretch can be held to constitute^ a part of the actual prosecution of the work of discovery. It is urged that an attempting locator is protected In his possession without commencing such work, provided he does not allow an unreasonable time to lapse without making such a commencement; and this appears to have been the theory of the learned judge of the trial court, as evidenced by one of his findings, where it is declared that plaintiffs, within a reasonable time thereafter, commenced in good faith the work of developing the said land, etc. Such commencement, as we have seen, was long after defendant's re-entry, and long after the commencement of this action. The rule declared by the decisions does not so provide. The attempting locator's possession Is protected only while he may fairly be held to be actually engaged in such work as may reasonably be held to be discovery work.It would seem to follow that, as to defendant's northerly location, plaintiffs were not protected In their alleged possession at the time of defendant's re-entry on Mayby reason of the posting of their notice of location. APolo Outlet Shirts s we have saidRalph Lauren Outlet Store, It cannot be fairly held that plaintiffs had then commenced aPolo Ralph Lauren Outlet ny work which by any stretch can be caCheap Ralph Lauren Clothes lled discovery work. Until they had made such a commencement, the claim was as freely open to defendant, under its location of http://www.ralph-laurensoutletstore.com September as it would have been had no notice of location been posted by plaintiff. Learned couPolo Outlet Online nsel for plaintiffs are in error in claiming that the location of defendant's predecessors had been forfeited. Such would have been the situation if a discovery had been made on the claim and the location thus perfected, and there had been a subsequent failure to do the annual assessment work expresely made necessary by statute to avoid a forfeiture, coupled with a subsequent valid location by an adverse claimant. Defendant's northerly location had never been perfected by discovery. In the absence of a voluntary abandonment of all claims thereunder, It had theright to enter into possession of the land and do discovery work thereon at any time that It could do so without transgressing any right obtained by another. The alleged occupancy of plaintiffs was not of such a nature as to destroy or affect this right of defendant; and defendant, in going again into possession and commencing discovery work on the land, did not violate any right of plaintiffs.In view of what we have said, it is apparent that the judgment must be reversed. A material finding, essential to plaintiffs' right to prevail as to the land embraced in defendant's northerly location, is not sufficiently supported by the evidence.We have not considered what the effect on plaintiffs' claim as to the southerly % of said N. E. % will be, if they finally fail to substantiate their claim as to the northerly half thereof; and, as that question has not been argued, we shall not attempt to determine it here. As we understand the record, all of plaintiffs' development work has been done on the northerly % of said N. E. y±.It is proper to say, for the purpose of a new trial, that we see no good reason for doubting that the evidence was such as to support a conclusion that there was a sufficient discovery by defendant, in S or , to perfect its location In so far as its southerly claim is concerned. Such would appear from the findings of the trial court to have been the view of the learned trial judge. The material question, then, In regard to the validity of such location at the time of

54