The Anaconda standard., 1897-12-31
THE WORLDS OWNERSHIP
More Than One Man Wants It
With a Fence Around It.
THIRD DAYS TESTIMONY
Whether 1t Is Good Mining Ground or
Good Only for Residence Prop
erty, That Is the Question
to Be Decided.

Another day was taken up to hearing
evidence in the World mining injunc-
ton cases in Judge Clancy's court yes
terday. NJ. l.. Haupt. the locator of the
World, which covers residence lots in
the Thornton addition owned by +. w.
Thomas and James McGovern, was on
the stand at the morning session. He
said he had known the ground for six
years, and had discovered mineral on it
in 1891, and in 1896 he located it.
1t is claimed by those opposed to
Haupt that the property is Valueless
as mining ground and that he did not
discover any mineral when he made the
location. but that he jumped the ground
for the purpose of making the owners
pay him some money to get him off.
On ross-examination Judge Mediation
asked Haupt If he had ever located a
valuable claim, and Haupt said he had
located one such, the Sunbury. He adj
mitted that he had other persons locate
many claims for him in different local
tiles.
Are you connected with an organza-
tion known as the Montana Mining
Loan & Investment Coz asked Mr.
Mediation.
The court ruled the question out as
lIllIiIdtelldl anu 4sIIiIdlIpit did
not succeed in bringing out anything
about that peculiar concern, Mediation
said he wanted To show that Haupt's
knowledge of mining consisted of hay-
ing other persons locate worthless
ground for him to work in connection
with his investment company and sell
stock to gullible people in the East.
The witness was also asked to give
the number of locations lie made on
ground covered with residences, but
that question was also ruled out
A witness named Monroe testified that
he examined the ground and considered
it of value.
r. H. Payne testified to the same
effect. and SO did a miner named Camp.
The testimony of Mr.. Camp closed
the case for MIR. Haupt and l. Z.
Smith. an assayer and mining expert,
was called as the first witness for the
other side and testified that he was IA
miliar with the ground in controversy
and that he had made examinations o.
both shafts on the World location. lie
said he found nothing in the discovery
shaft except altered granite with seams
running in every direction, and found
nothing that could be assayed. IA the
other shaft about the same conditions
prevailed and the only mineral he FOUND
was that deposited in seams of rock Dy
water running through them. Iie said
there was nothing on the surface Of
Itlb BIOuilI u l2IliIdAt u ~~i.
What have you to say as to thefe
being any vein or lode in this ground
asked Mr.. Mediation.
There are none"
On cross examination by Mr. Hail the
witness was asked il blind leads" did
not often develop into rich veins. The
witness said he had known such cases,
but they We're exceptions to the rule.
He had selected a few samples from
the shafts, but he did not consider it
vein matter. though 1t was the nearest
approach to it he could find in the
ground. He said the samples. which he
produced, were simple altered granite.
He took some of the rock from five or
SIX Inch ereyasse he found in the coun-
try rock, but he refused to call the
crevasse vein or regard the rock on
each side as walls. He said the stuff
found in the alleged vein and described
as tale was nothing but mud de-
posit.
Why didn't you bring better samples
of vein matter into court ~
Those were the best | could find.
The witness explained to Mr. Hall
how veins are formed, which concluded
his testimony.
Deputy Clerk Simmons of the county
clerk and recorders office was put on
the stand for the purpose of Identifying
some records relating To the ground in
controversy. The notice of the location
Oh the Lelid lIllll site DS w llIlalli IL
Hartman on June IS, 1881. was offered
in evidence by Judge Mediation and
objected to by Mr.. Hall on the ground
that ii did not show that the location
was made for the purpose of using the
ground for a mill or that it was To-
Gated in connection with any quartz
lode claim. The objection Was over
ruled and the notice was admitted The
locator swore that the ground was nom
mineral. A deed from Hartman to j.
c. c. Thornton for the mill site. A pat
ent to the Blue Jay lode claim, plat
of the Thornton addition showing that
il includes the ground IN controversy.
and number of deeds showing a
chain of title to the present owners,
Thomas and McGovern, We're also in
treduced in evidence.
Thomas kilgallon. foreman of the
Colusa-Parf6t. was the next witness.
and testified that he had been engaged
in mining around Butte for 70 years
He examined the shafts on the World
and found no indications of quartz or
anything that might be called 4 vein.
The samples taken from the ground he
considered nothing more than granite.
lie found in the shafts some slips or
seams of discoored granite. but such
seams can also be found in all kinds
of excavations around Butte. said the
witness. Mr.. kilgallon testified as TO
the width of different veins in tie
mines about Butte He said he was
Oh the 900-foot level of the NeyersWeat
q few days ago ard saw the vein run
ming from to 20 or 30 feet wide
What value would you place ON the
World as a mining cIaim2" asked Judge
Mediation.
Il wouldn't give i cents fer ii my
self as a mining claim, replied the Wit
ness.
Thomas Bryant foreman of the ORR
ginal mine. testified that he had made
an examination Of the showings in the
World shafts and his conclusions were
that If he owned the properly as min
ing ground he would consider himself
raraIat. indeed He sail fharn NNaS m