The Helena independent. [volume] (Helena, Mont.) 1875-1943, 1892-04-07
KNOWN" LODE DECISION.
important Decision by the United
States Supreme Court Of Inter-
est TO Mining Men.
The Question Involved That Re-
lating to Known and Located
Lodes.

Isodes.
The TER aKnown. Vein nj "IsecAted's
vein Arc mot synonymous-Justice
TiciA's Rulings Upheld.
Tho following decision, rendered by the
United States supreme eourt In the casa Of
the Iron Silver Mining company W. the
Mike u Starr Gold and Silver Mining conf
pany. ID Of GrsAt Importance to mining
msn, ~ it settles the question Of known"
aud located veins The issue IL con-
tinuously being raised in the local land
Offices, and this decision by the. highest
tribunal in the land, will settle many vexed
points. The court says:
This a two kindred cases have bson
before ne for confederation for some time.
They have t,een twice argued. tho rs-argu-
msnt having been ordered BY tho court Of
ltd own motion; and ON tho second argu-
ment. at the like instance. very elaborate
and complete medela, maps and photo
graphs were prepared by tbs respective
parties and presented for our examination.
The fact 10. there WAS An sarnsst inquiry ~
to whether the court had not erred in its
prior and repeated ruling, that a known
lode, az named in section 2.333 Of the Re-
vised Statutes, il something other than q
located lode; and, also, whether, in view Of
the disclosures made in this, ~ in prior
cases, Of the existence OF q body
Of mineral underlying large
section OF country In the Lsadvills
mining district, whose general horizontal
direction, together with the sedimentary
character Of the superior rock, indicated
something more Of the nature Of a deposit
like 4 coal bed than Of the vertical and
descending fssure vein, in which silver =
gold are ordinarily found, it did not be
come necessary to hold that the only pro
visions of thu statute under which title to
any portion Of this body Of mineral. Or the
ground il which il is situated. can be &c
quired are those with respect to placer
claims. OF oourse, such conclusions
would have compelled : revising Of some
tprA,er opinions and have wrought great
changes in this status of mining claims in
that district. Because Of this VIC have
bsen very careful. and the investigation in
these directions have bsen earnest and pro-
LT8Ct3Gs IL WOulu 80EN0 40 VhCl4A QuA p0bV
to state all the arguments which have been
advanced and considered by us. It is
enough to announce the results. Our con-
illusions are, first, in respect to the matter
OF the known vein. that the rea-
sons SO clearly stated BY Mr.. Justice
case OF Noyes '. Mantle (l27 u. s. 348. 353),
are nnanswerabls, and forbid an %Adjudica-
ton that the term known vein" j. to be
taken ~ synonymous with located vein,'
and compel q reiteratien Of the declaration
heretofore made, that the term refers to q
vein or lods whose existence u known. ~
contradistinguished from the one which
has been appropriated BY location; : -
10 the other matter, that the title to por-
tions Of this horizontal vein or deposit,
'"hlankef' vein an il is generally called,
may be acquired under thn sections CON
cerning veins, lodes, etc, Inc Iaot that 80
many patsAts have besn obtained under
these sections, and that 50 many applica-
tions for patents are still pending, is a
strong reason against 4 new aud contrary
ruling. That which has been accepted ~
law and acted upon by that mining com
munity for such = length OF time should not
be adjudgsd wholly = mistake and put en-
tirely aside because of difficulties in the ap-
plication Of some minor provisions to the
peculiarities of this vein or deposit. With
this explanation of the reasons for the long
delay in the deciSion of this case, We pass
TO the epeolaA taaSters In oont'uVetey.
Tbs questions presented oy inc p1eao1nes
30 be tried were, Whetner tnsre WAs u VS1n
or lode Within the terrlsor1hA D~ouAuatles q
the placer; ana II 50, Wne.nef ~ was 9
known vein or 1000 Witnln Inc noanlhR OF
section 2,3s5. ire pialntln, " MAINTAIN
it's ease, offered IN evidence e1MpAy 1ss paw
emit and other masters OF leoolo' so9o.4er
With parol PROOF Of A ~ .niS
record evidence IT appearea .hat sne app1l-
cation for me placer pa 1ozn. Was lnauo ~
the 18TH OF november. ioso' .uas sn11y anu
paynent were mace On .na ~ ~ ns51u-
airy. 1914, ana tnas TUG pa.one VS. issusu "
Jan. ~, 1857: Inc loca.lon celsluease q
the doodell lode Was uaseu Mafon ~ lug
1900 dcd March -, lo1s' leolslnR = looas.on
on Feb. !. 1919. A1ter tns o.
this testimony the plaintlH fssted, ana Dy ~
= prima facle title TO the whole placer claim
WAS established. The location Of tho dood-
ell lode was some montns h1tef Inc ~
pl1catlon for mo placer patent. Inc de-
PENDANT, to maintain is claim, offered the
testimony OF several Witnesses. testimony
which established 9 eyond any doubt that
in 1877, n more than ayear before any
proceedings were INFLATED with reference
to the placer patent. the Rrantors OF de-
PENDANT entered upon and ran a tunnel
some 400 feet in length into and through
that ground which aftsrward was patented
as the placer tract; n that IN running
such tunnel they interested and crossed
three veins, n OF which Waa thereafter,
and in 1889. located as the Goodell vein or
lode. The vein thus crossed and disclosed