The Anaconda standard., 1895-12-15
LAST CHANCE WINS
Judge Beatty'S Decision in the Fam
Gus Mining Case.
JUDGMENT AGAINST TYLER
A Point Similar to That Which En-
tered into the Amy SiIvsrsmith
Litigation-it Has Been in
Many Courts


special Dispatch to the Standard.
Boise. Idaho. Dec. 14.-In the United
States circuit court to-day Judge Beat
~ handed down a decision in the cele-
brated mining case OF the Tyler Va.
the Last Chance. His decision is In ia
vor of the Last Chance. giving that
company the ground In controversy.
The decision turns upon the question OF
priority. which had already been de-
cided by higher courts in favor of the
defendant The vital part OF the de-
cision IN as follows: The supreme
court. when considering the case. Q57
United States. ante) after deciding on
ly that issue which nxed the priority OF
location In the Last Chance. reversed
and remanded IL to this court for q
new trial The Last Chance claim II
prior; Is SO located that the courts all
say its owner Is entitled TO follow the
ledge on It's downward course between
the vertical planes of what were locat-
ed as its side lines. The defendant Last
Chance company is therefore entitled
to judgment against the plaintiff for
the possession of the premises In dis
pute. which lie between those planes
which descend vertically from those
two lines OF the Last Chance. which
were located as its side lines. and II Is
ordered accordingly
The larger part OF the decision Il
taken up with discussion of n point
similar to that which entered into the
Amy -Silversmith case. In the latter
case the supreme court decided that a
claim I'm which the vein crossed both
side lines had no extralateral rights
This point was raised by counsel for
the Last Chance in the case just de-
cided. The vein In the Tyler intersects
one side line OF the original location.
and counsel for the Last Chance main
tained that IL a claim had not extraia-
teral rights when the vein crossed
both side lines. the same reasoning
would exclude from II such rights n
the vein intersected one end line and
one side line. as in the case OF the Ty-
Ter.
On this point Judge Beatty holds
against the contention of the Last
Chance company. He says: 1T II
manifest that this rule cannot be fol-
lowed when the apex OF a ledge. before
reaching the other end line. passes out
OF the side line. for II would give the
locator more OF the ledge under ground
than he has OF the apex. 10 would give
him a portion of the ledge of which he
does not hold the apex. To hold that
his ledge shall be cut of by the vertf-
cal plane and side lire. Is cutting on
the right to follow IL down. which the
law has given him. Instead of this.
20 establish at the point where the
apex crosses the side line. q vertical
plane parallel 20 the plane of the
side line cut by the apex. and allow 10
70 follow the ledge on it's dip between
the two planes. Is not q violation Of
any provision OF the statute and gives
the miner only those rights which the
statute intends he should have"
The court by the cases above cited
has so held. and IL Is now held. that
plaintiff can so follow the ledge as Tar
as not In conflict with some prior right.
Applying this rule 10 the Republican
fraction. q small wedged-shaped piece
of ground lying between the Last
Chance and Tyler and belonging TO
the Last Chance people. Judge Beatty
decides that the Tyler company can
follow the ledge through that territory.
This Is because the Tyler holds prior
ity OF location over the Republican
fraction. Judge Beatty's decision
brings TO an end one of the
most famous cases of mining litigation
that has ever arisen IN the West. The
case has twice been TO the court of ap-
pesls and once TO the United States
supreme court