The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1899-07-25
MORE ORE IN LITIGATION
Suits That Are a Part of a. Ta-
nous Fight in Butte.
SOME FINE POINTS RAISED
In This Pair of Lawsuits Between Mr..
Heinze and the Boston People
Law and Geology Will
Figure.

The litigation now pending with ref
erence to mining properties in the Butte
district is of the most important char
acter. Not so much because of the ac-
tual or supposed money value of the
rights in controversy as by reason of
the nature of the questions involved,
and the far reaching effect which their
decision may have upon rights in min
eral lodes throughout the entire coun-
try. The actions both at law and in
equity are being watched with the
keenest interest by the members of the
local bar. and with even more intense
feeling by the eminent biologists and
mining engineers, who in one relation
or another have lately been attracted
to Butte
Last week reference was made to the
case of the Anaconda company against
the Colusa- Parrot. and the nature of
the issue was stated as well as it is
known to any outside the immediate
parties in interest. That case having
gone over until September public in
terest now centers in the action by the
Montana Ore Purchasing company
against the Boston & Montana This
case is said by attorneys and experts
to be even more important than the
Anaconda case against the Colusa-Par-
rot. 1t is certainly more difficult and
complex, both in a legal and geological
point of view. The suit is a double ac-
ton at law and in equity, two distinct
causes of action being stated by the
plaintiff.
The first is simple action of tres
pass, in which the Montana Ore Pur-
chasing company, after alleging its
ownership of the Johnstown lode claims
100000 damages, the value of ore
claimed to have been extracted from
the lode by the Boston & Montana peo-
pie. The special averment is that the
Youngstown lode dips to the south to
such an extent as to carry it beyond
the south side line of that claim and
under the surface of the Pennsylvania
claim from which portion of the lode
in question 1t is alleged that the ore has
been taken through the workings of the
Pennsylvania.
In the second or equity cause of ac-
tlon 1t is alleged that the defendant
the Boston Il Montana company-claims
an estate or interest adverse to plant
if in that part of the lode which lies
beneath the surface lines of the Penn
sylvania, which claim although with
out any right whatever, casts a cloud
upon the plaintiffs title, and it is asked
that the defendant be required to set
forth the nature of its claim, to the end
that it may be determined by decree
of the court.
1T is alleged that the settlement of
the controversy by proceedings at law
will involve a multiplicity of suits bv
reason OF the varying conditions which
the plaintiff would claim existed at diff
ferent points in the lode. and the court
Is asked to settle all the questions in
VOWED, besides granting an injunction
n nm, hlI 49,
PENDANT from extracting ore from the
portion of the lode in dispute, and that
the defendant be forever debarred and
enJoined from asserting any claim
thereto.
The Boston and Montana company in
its answer denies all of the material al
legations of the complaint. Denies
that any of the lodes or veins beneath
the surface of the Pennsylvania belong
to the plaintiff, and claims the owner
ship of all such veins and lodes. In
short, without going into the details
or Voluminous pleadings, the issue
of ownership Is made in the most di-
rect and positive way. The defendant
also alleges that an action covering the
same points brought by the defendant
against the plaintiff is now pending in
the United States circuit court for the
District of Montana, and that the ac-
tons of the plaintiff are brought for
the purpose of annoying the defendant
1t Is not an easy matter for an out
slider to determine the precise legal or
geological questions upon which the is
sues will he determined, for both par
ties are more or less reticent concern
ing them. The law points, of course
will depend upon the geological cond-
lions shown to exist, and here is where
a battle royal is expected both sides
having secured the services of some of
the shrewdest and ablest mining ex-
perts in the country.
In a general way, It is supposed that
the contest will be between the zone
theory and the single ledge principle 1t
is intimated that in the disputed ground
there are various veins or lodges of
ore carrying heavy deposits of mineral,
separated by bodies mineralized so
slightly as to be virtually barren. The
zone theory is that a belt or strip thus
is to be regarded as a
single lode, however many different
veins and lodges it may contain. The
separate ledge theory holds each vein
or ledge thus situated as distinct lode,
no matter how many others there may
be within the same mineralized zone.
There are doubtless many minute
distinctions, difficult, if not impossible,
for a layman to clearly grasp. Aside
from the beneral principle, it is more
than likely that many questions per-
tanning ITO Irregularities, such as chang
es in the strike or dip, and faults or
breaks in the ledge or lodges, will play
an important part.
The case is set for trial August II,
in the district court of Silver Bow coun-
ty. In the meantime the experts are
making the most thorough study of
the formation and their testimony will