Sierra County advocate. [volume] (Kingston, N.M.) 1884-1960, 1894-10-05
domestic, gas, steaming, cokIug,
aud smithtng Goals
MINING DECISIONS
Denver Ores and Metals

9"'f W M ctlpiOye. - 4 u
/. supreme court of Illinois hold
| that where miner who was d
rected TO move a coal car along
dark, narrow passage in min,
with which he was not famllal
went in front Of the car when !
was stuck on down grade an,
pulled 1t toward him, whereupol
the car ran rapidly down the grad
and injured him, 1t was helc
that his failure TO know that til,
car was on down grade when b,
pulled it did not show want o.
ordinary care. Where the evi.
dence shows that when he was
injured he was working in coal
mine belonging to defendant, and
there is evidence that he was EN-
ployed by aad working under the
direction of foreman who was
experimenting the operation of
the mine. the question whether he
was defendants servant is for the
iury.-CoD. Coal Co. VS. Bruce.
The payment of royalty. The
Supreme court of Illinois holds
that coal mining lease which
provided that the lessee should
pay royalty of three eights of a
cent per bushel, aud should guaran-
tee a yearly royalty of not less than
$1,000, and declares that il no coal
shall be mined, and the lessee
should pay the monthly install
ments on its monthly guaranty of
$l,2Q0 a year, such payments
shonld be considered as advanced
royalties to be credited on mining
thereafter done. 1t was held that
the guaranteed royalty WAS payable
monthly and not annually Con.
Coal Co. VS.. Peers.
Rights of widow in mining lease.
Where widow is assigned dover
IN land, subject to a mining lease
given by her husband and herself,
which provides that the lessee shall
pay annually 81 per acre until it
opens mines on the land, and then
shall pay a certain royalty, the |
widow is entitled to all payments
falling due after her dover is as
signed, although the mines have
not been opened at that time. =
Priddy VS.. Griffith, Supreme Court
OF Illinois.
Where fixtures are part of min.
ing cleim Under the statutes
that mining claims are
not taxable, an engine and boiler
built into a brick foundation, and
irmly affixed by bolts loaded down
md used in working a mine. are
part of a mining claim and not
.axable. Mammoth M. Co. VS.
Juab Co. Supreme Court of
Utah.
Apportionment of deliveries not
"A contract for the sale
# the entire output of certain coal
mines, at prices payable in monthly
nstallments, for the coal at the ,
mines. the buyer agreeing to ship
nd pay for at least a certain
Iuantlty per annum, provided so /
much is furnished him, cannot be [
because Of circumstan- I
es existing when II was made, to
equlre him to take the coal mon |
hly, in such quantities as to keep (
TiSs %' %i' t I1f Tnis rIii1-I {
easonably employed, as they had
been and were at the +
Ipas os the. aaDtgAes, thus ,Tn nposiDg4-
n him distinct and unexpressed {
-Thipman VS., Safsburg o
)oal Company, 62 Feb. Rep, 145. $
Circuit Court of Appeals THIRD n
'ircuit L
Damages for breach OF contract. a
lbject to further agreement "A q
for the sale OF the entire +
utput of a colliery for more than a
D years provided that the price @
nould be agreed upon from mouth ii
} month 10y the parties. 1t was o
eld that, on a refusal to deliver %