The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1895-11-12

and extending north OF the Amy-Silver-
smith north side line. We quoted sec
ton 1922. United States Revised Stat
utes. which is as follows:
The locaItors of all mining locations
shall have the exclusive
right OF possession and enjoyment OF
all veins. lodes and hedges.
throughout their entire depth. The top
or apex of which lies inside of such
surface lines. extended downward ver-
tically, although such veins, lodes or
lodges may so far depart from a per-
pendicular in their course downward
as to extend outside the vertical side
lines of such surface locations. But
their right of possession to such out
side parts of such veins or lodges shall
be confined to such portions thereof
as lie between vertical planes, drawn
downward. as above described, through
the end lines of their locations, so
continued in their own direction that
such planes will intersect such exterior
parts of such veins or lodges
We then said: las said by Mr.. JUS
tice Field Uron Silver Min. Co. VS..
Efgfn Min. Co.. lis u. S. 200: This
section appears sufficiently clear on ITS
face. There is no patent or latent
ambiguity in II The diff
Guilty arising from the section grows
out of its application to claims where
the course of the vein is so variant
from straight line that the end lines
of the surface location are not parallel.
or, II so are not at right angle to the
course of the VEIN We may add to
these words that further difficulties
arise when we are obliged to apply the
statute to facts not wholly within It's
contemplation. If a mining location be
made regularly-made so that the
strike of the vein crosses the location
from end line to end line, and al right
angles to said end lines-there is moth
ing in the statute to construe or in
terpret.
(Flaggstaff S. Co. VS.. Tarbut, IS L. s.
469; Iron Silver Min. Co VS.. Elgin Min
Co., lis u. S. POS: Argentine Min. Co.
VS.. Terrible Min. Co.. 122 u. s. 4S5.)
There is no patent or latent ambi-
guilty But when veins or their
strikes cross the side lines, or a side
line and end line. at all conceivable
angles. difficulties confront the courts
that can best be met by legislative
aid. Until such aid is invoked, the
courts must follow the statute and
previous construction as closely as the
varying facts will permit. Qron Silver
Min. Co. VS.. Elgin Min. Co., lis u. S.
POSI- The history of mining has proven
that the law of May 10. 1872, and
amendments thereto. do not afford
clear. adequate. and simple solution
for some of the practical conditions
that arise in the development of the
mining industry. The case at bar Is a
notable instance. 1t is first impress
sion in this court. and all other APP
pellate courts"
After stating what we understood to
be the meaning of the words dip"
strike" etc. as used by miners, and
in the decisions. we further sadd:
The United States mineral law gives
to the miner the whole of every vein
the apex of which lies within his sur
face exterior boundaries. or which lies
within perpendicular planes drawn
downward indefinitely on the lines of
those boundaries. The miner may fol-
low the dip.
wherever ii goes. provided he has the
apex as a basis of operation, and that
he does not cross the vertical planes of
the end lines. The intent of the statute
is to give the miner "a section or block
of the vein of a length on the strike
which is equal to the length of the
apex lying within the exterior verti-
cal bounding planes of the location,
and of a depfh as far as he desires or
is able TO work downward. and at the
most remote depth attained he shall
have the same number of feet on the
strike as he had at the apex. Qron
Silver Min. Co. VS.. Elgin Min. Co., lis
u. s. 205)''
We have always been of the opinion
that This is the kew note of the inter-
probation of section 1922, Revised
Statutes. United States: that is to say,
IL the miner has the apex in his To-
cation. he is TO have the vein, and ne
has as much length of the vein on the
strike. no matter how deep he may go
on the dip, as he has length of apex
within his surface lines. whether that
beneath the same within the planes of
his exterior boundary lines extending
downward perpendicularly. This. in
our opinion. is what section 1922 says
in plain language.
Continuing further in the Amy-Sn-
versrnith case. we said: "It seems
that such grant by the statute to the
miner, in view of the geological facts
and history Of veins. and particularly
their almost universal tendency TO de-
pant from a perpendicular in their
course downward. was deemed to Sc
cure to him a more satisfactory title
than he would obtain II he were COM
PEELED to locate a parallelogram on the
surface of the earth. as under THE
Spanish mining law. and take all, and
only. that portion OF the solid contents
OF the earth included in a parallelopi-
pedon formed by dropping vertical
planes downward on THE line of each
side of such parallelogram: and the in
tent of the statutory grant OF section
1922 Is that the miner may follow his
vein on the dip. but not ON the strike,
II Vt departs from the parallelopipedon /
indicated. Therefore. IL the miner To- |
Gates his claim regularly-that Is, as
the statute contemDlates that ne will |
he has adj that the statute intends to /
give him (See cases cited supraD II /
he will not or cannot make the ex- |
plorations necessary TO ascertain the |
true course Of the vein. and draws his /
end hines ignorantly. he must bear the |
Uron Silver Min. Co
vs.. Elgin Min. Co. lis u. s. POD: that /
il. he takes less of the apex and strike /
than he would obtain by a regular To-
cation, and consequently less of the /
diD."
We are still Of opinion that the loss /
which a ulner should suffer IL he Is i