The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1899-10-03
The Battle of Experts in Judge
Clancy's Court.
BRIGHT MEN ON THE STAND
Opposing Geological Theories-The Strike
of the Lode-Is 1t Continuous?
Where Does 1t Apex?-Trac-
ing Connections.


with each succeeding day. Since the
close of Mr.. Bulkly's testimony Experts
Braden, Word and Akers have testified,
and Mr. Tyler Of Denver, the defend
ants sixth expert witness, is still on
the stand.
Mr.. Bulky was cross-examined by
Mr.. Hughes with great ability, vigor
and persistency. To one not thoroughly
familiar with the case it appears that
the witness fully sustained his position,
and such is the claim made by those
connected with the defendants side Of
the case. On the other hand the plain
titt's representa- tives, whle admitting
Bulklys ability and me 1tal alertness,
insist that he broke badly a number OF
times beneath the pressure of Mr.
Hughes searching cross-examinatlon.
The third witness for the defendant
was William Braden of Butte. Mr..
Braden is young man. only % years of
age, and to a great extent self-edu-
Gated he having merely laid the foun-
dations of his scientific education at
the technical schools which he attend
ed. But his testimony. both in chief
and upon cross-eXamination, showed
him to be we'll up in the class OF able
experts with whom he is associated.
Clarence King, than whom there is no
more distinguished mining geologist in
the United States, speaks of Mr.. Braden
in high terms
This witness agreed closely with Mr..
Bulky in his view of the geological
formation, the assuring, the extent and
character of the movement by which
the cross assures had been made, the
correlation of the veins and the charac-
ter of the country between the faults.
1t is doubtful if any of the defendants
witnesses, excepting possibly Mr..
Hayes, was pressed by Mr.. Hughes
with greater vigor than was Mr.. Bra
den. Here, as in the other cases, we
have the usual opposing array of opin-
ions as to the result. Upon the plain
tiff's side it is claimed that his testi-
mony was badly shattered, while the
defense insists that he fully sustained
himself upon every material point.
He was followed by Mr.. Word, but
the representative of the Standards
mining department did not hear any
portion of his testimony.
The next was William A. Akers. This
was another brilliant witness, and the
most directly aggressive of all who
have thus far testified on behalf of the
defendant He created sort of quiet
sensation by direct attack upon the
accuracy of one of the plaintiffs cross
section maps, declaring that it repre-
sneted a g, cat deal OF free hand draw
ing and a most liberal use of 'projec-
tion;" in fact that the cross-section
shows veins and tore bodies where there
are none. The general comment was
that in the matter of combattveness
this witness and Mr.. Hughes measure
bly, reversed positions, the attorney be-
coming comparatively mild and persua-
sive, while the witness stood his ground
with fir1nness that, at times, seemed
to almost, if not quite, place him upon
the offensive. The elegance of his die
ton was quite feature of his testl-
n,ony.
There Is probably no other class of
cases in which the testimony is so diff
cult to follow and correlate as that of
expert witnesses In mining suit. This
is especially true Of the case now on
trial, because of the complex and alb
Strnsa character Of the geological ques-
tons involved. The experts themselves
declare that in this respect the case has
probably never been equaled in an
American court But out of the con-
fused and apparently disjointed mass of
testimony it is now possible to gather
with more or less distinctness some
thing of the conflicting theories based
upon what appear to be remarka BILE
geological conditions.
In the first place the plaintiff claims
to be the owner of the Johnstown lode,
tends lengthwise from east to west
through the Jamestown claim. parallel
with the side lines, and passing out
through both the east and west end
lines. If this allegation can be made
| good, then the plaintiff has a right to
follow the ledge down upon its dip in
definitely, even though the dip carry 1t
| beyond the south side line of the claim.
extending vertically downward. This
seems to be conceded.
But the defendant denies that the
| Johnstown lode extends east and west
| the entire length of the claim, passing
out through the end lines On the con-
trary it is shown by the defendant
| apex map that the so-called Johns
town lode in its eastern portion, takes
| a southerly strike which carries 1t
across the south side line of the Johns
| town claim before the east end line Is
reached. Consequently that the princ.-
| pie invoked does not apply, and that
| the plaintiff has no extra lateral rights
whatever. In other words. the plaintiff
can follow the ledge downward on it's
dip until the south side line is reached
and no further it's rights being con-
fined within its surface boundary lines
| extended vertically downward. This
seems to be the defendants theory of
both the strike or direction Of the lode,
and the law applying to such condi-
| ton.
Upon this point the issue appears to be
| direct enough in principle, the difficulty
being to determine the geological fact.
| The plaintiffs experts are positive that
the lode passes out through the end
lines, while the defendants experts are
| Just as certain that 1T bears to the
south and cuts the south side line of The
| claim.
| There are other questions also iu-
| VolVed. The defendant denies that there
| is any discovery vein whatever in the
Johnstown claim-thatthe lode nowhere
reaches the surface, which is also re-
garded as cutting off the plaintiff S
| right to follow the vein beyond the side
! lines of the claim. Putting it as simply
as possible, the defendants view APP
pears to be that a party cannot; dig
| down into the earth and find vein,
thereby acquiring the right to follow it
wherever it may go. but in order to OBJ
tain such right the vein or lode must
be found on the surface. Whether this
will be accepted by the plaintiff as good
law has not yet appeared, but certain
it Is that the plaintiff stoutly claims
| that there is a discovery vein in the