The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1897-12-23
IN FAVOR OF A. F. GRAY
Mining Contest Decided by the
Helena Land Office.
SIX CLAIMS WERE MADE
1t Is He'd That Weyerhorst Failed to
Comply With the Requirements of
the Mineral Land Laws-Ap-
plication Denied.

The land Office at Helena has decided
a mining contest of Andrew T.. Gray
against Joseph Weyerhorst. in favor of
Gray. An order to that effect was re-
ceived yesterday by George B. Dygert,
counsel for Gray. The property in
Nolved is located in Saratoga gulch, and
comprises six quartz claims, called the
Josephine, Jessie, Annie, Antoinette,
Bertha and Henrietta. Weyerhorst APP
piled for a patent and Gray protested
against ii on April % last. Gray claimed
that the ground was not staked as re-
quired by law and that no valuable
discovery of mineral was made. but that
the discovery shafts were sunk in gran
ute. He further alleged that plats were
not posted on the ground and that the
required development and expenditure
had not been made.
! The land office appointed DGay Stiv-
ers referee to take testimony, and a
number of witnesses were examined for
both sides Those for the protestant all
Testified that no discovery of mineral
bearing quartz had been made on any
of the claims except on the Henrietta.
and that the claims were not properly
staked and that no greater sum has
been expended on the six locations than
from 5000 to 5000. They all testified that
no plats had been posted on the ground
and that they frequently passed over
AIle idiu anu Ddu opportunities OF seeing
them If they had been posted. The
work done on the discovery shafts did
not meet the requirements of the law
and two of the tunnels We're built on
Ihe surface and were for effect rather
mining purposes.
The witnesses for Weyerhorst on the
other hand, testified there had been ex-
pended on the ground from 5000 to 500
hut on other points their testimony diff
fered materially. Some of them claimed
that there was mineral all over the six
locations, while others found mineral
only on the Henrietta. Some of the wit
nesses saw portion of the stakes. and
one witness said plats We're posted on all
the claims, but the other witnesses did
mot see them. Some of them found good
leads, while others found stringers and
indications of quartz. but nothing WAS
shown as to whether these stringers
contained any precious metals. After a
review of the testimony the land office
concludes its order as follows:
The ground in question lies near the |
city of Butte, which is a very active |
mining center. and prospecting in this
vicinity is actively carried on, and the |
presumption is that il this ground |
showed indications Of mineral in pay |
ing quantities that IL would long ago |
have been located. and If the showing |
warranted would have been developed.
The law requires that where applica-
ton for patent is made such location |
must show an expenditure of not less
than $500. or where application for pat
ent is made for a group of contiguous
claims an expenditure of not less than
$500, which Is for the common benefit
of all the claims.
THE claimant, in his testimony. states
he has expended $500 on the entire prop
erty The surveyors certificate and that
OF the surveyor general place the eX-
pendltnres at $3.50 but ii is divided