The record-union., 1897-07-30
THE FAMOUS HILLTOP MINE.
AN ORDER THAT CONCERNS
SEVERAL CREDITORS.
The Sheriff to Surrender to the Re-
ceiver All Except the Gold in
the Sluices.

| AlS VI lAiC ANCNCiNCl III TIE case JdIllGS
b. Ritter against the Interior Develop
ment Company of Michigan Bar. Sher-
iff Johnson was directed to release the
attachments levied by him on all prop
erty of the mine except the gold coll
lected in the cuts and sluices, and to
J surrender the same to Receiver S. b.
Smith.
As there are many firms and individ-
uals concerned in this case. in which
nearly 100000 is involved, the follow
ing decision by Judge Hart will be of
| interest:
This is proceeding, says the court, in
the nature of a motion to modify or
amend an order made by this court ap-
| pointing receiver in the above en-
titled case, and also a citation to the
Sheriff of this county to show cause why
he should not be punished for contempt
for interfering with property involved in
the mortgage. to foreclose which the ac-
ton of Jennie B. Ritter ct al VS. The In
terror Development Company ct al. is
| brought.
| Several questions were presented and
argued to the court, but the main prop
| osltlon in the case is whether or not the
| property attached by Baker & Hamil-
! ton, represented by Mr.. Hatfield, and by
| one WlrtS, represented by H. w. John
son, was part of that involved in the
| mortgage executed by the Interior De-
Velopment Company to the plaintiff and
| constituted fixtures within the mean
| ing of Section 661 of the Civil Code. the
| mortgage being upon mining property.
The section mentioned reads as follows:
Slulce-boXes, fumes. hose, pipes rail-
way tracks, cars, blacksmith shops.
mills, and all other machinery or tools
used in working or developing a mine,
are to be deemed affixed to the mine"
| 1t will be conceded that anything that
is absolutely essential to the working
or developing of a mine, is, under the
| section of the law quoted. fixture
thereof or appurtenant thereto, whether
ccnstructively annexed or otherwise.
The property attached by Baker & Ham
llton, other than the gold which had
been washed by hydraulic process from
its original position in the earth. con-
sisted of two strings of hydraulic pipe
| OF ZOO feet in each string, and also one
thompson & Hughson arc-iamp dyna-
mo, 16 two-thousand candle power arc
lamps, and all wire connections and ap-
pHances constituting the electric light
Ing plant now and heretofore in use by
the Interior Development Company.
There can be no question that the hy-
draullc pipes levied upon We're and are
1lXtures of the mine and were included in
IN property mortgaged and without
which the mine could not be worked
or developed" There was evidence in
troduced, and stands uncontradicted.
that the electric light plant was used for
the purpose of enabling the prosecution
OF work in the mine during the night.
1t was evidently constructed for that
purpose. 1t is equally true that it is
part of the fixtures of the mine and
that it is included within the mortgaged
property, if not specifically, certainly as
part of the realty.
In the Wirts case the following prop
erty was levied upon: About one-quar-
ter of mile of 30-inch f1ume, six 1I-inch
hydraulic gates, one 15-inch hydraulic
gate, one No. 1 hydraulic monitor, one
No. hydraulic monitor, 500 feet of IL
inch iron pipe, $50 feet of 15-inch iron
pipe, 3 wheelbarrows, and all the mining
TOOLS. What is said concerning the
pipes, etc, attached by Baker & Hamil-
ton true of the property just mentioned
as having been levied upon by Wirts-
that is to say, that the articles are part
of the fixtures of the mine and are in
cluded within the mortgaged property
as part of the realty. Both Baker &
Hamilton and Wirts also attached all
the gold in cuts connected with the
mine and all the amalgam and gold in
the Sluices.
The question in relation to this par
ticular property is whether or not the
gold thus levied upon, having been sew
cred from the mine and precipitated
into the cuts and sluices is personal
property not within the mortgage
and subject to attachment in these
cases. l think there is much force in
the contention of counsel that the gold.
when severed or removed from its nat
ural state or position, becomes person.
atty. 1t can be taken as any other per-
sonaI property-it is the subject of as
portation just the same as other personal
property. IL 1t We're taken, the remedy
for its recovery would be by a personal
action, to wit, suit in replevn "If
the minerals are once severed from the
inheritance they are no longer part
of the freehold, but personal chattels.
Cambridge on the Law Of Mines and
Minerals, American edition. mage <
The case of Lykens Valley Coal Com
pany VS. Dock, assignee (52 Penn. State
Reports, page $3.50, was an action of
trover to recover. amongst other arti-
cles, 5000 tons of coal which had been
taken from coal mine and which was
still on the mining property The les
sees OF the mine made an assignment
to dock for the benefit of their creditors.
The lessons or owners Of the mine after
wards entered and took possession of the
personal property claimed by the as
signee including the coal in litigation.
One of the questions in the case was
whether the coal thus mined, not having
been removed from the mine was part
of the realty. 1t was there said:
Until the coal is mined it remains
real estate. AS soon as severed it be-
comes personal property, although not
removed from the runs There were
many of these runs and generally full
of the mined coal. which was to be re-
moved from the lower end next the
gang-way and would come down to the
opening by its own weight, the angle of
descent being quite steep. At the time
the mining ceased they had not reached
the open end of the mine with any of the
runs. and it would seem that the coal
had been left in the runs the better to
enable the elaborers to mine the remainder.
We have no hesitation in saying that
this mined coal in the runs was personal
the tenant. and passed by the general
a c; ;crOr11pnt tO Mr. DooIz ,r-lo lo3 +l,o