The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1899-09-16
Yes; they are very close"
t1,nyv l,

Yes; they are very close"
| DO they cross there?" ,H
Not as shown by the developments.
| DO they unite?"
Not as shown by the developments. "
This is about the point where all the
| plaintiffs witnesses merged the north
connecting vein in the Rarus vein, OF
| south vein, as called by Mr.. Hayes
| The witness and the defendants apex
! map carry the vein on to the east on a
| line more or less parallel with the
| Rarus or south vein.
Mr.. Hughes and Mr.. Hayes went over
| the course of the south vein from a
| point near the west end line of the
decided ground to where the west fault
| cuts it off beyond the east end line of
| the ground. The few surface workings
| disclosing it do not make its outline or
course clear in this part of the ground,
so the apex ground is dotted to indi-
| cate that its course is undeveloped here.
Then. Mr.. Hayes, you cannot say
| that there is only one vein along the
| course indicated by the apex line of
| this map? There may be more than
| one vein there. You cannot be sure?'
asked Mr.. Hughes.
mo; l cannot be sure" said the wit
ness.
Developments might show the apex
line as delineated to be entirely wrong,
might they not?'
Yes"
The third vein south in the parallel
series of three on the apex map was
called the nameless vein by the witness.
who said it was not known and had not
been named. The witness next went
over the surface developments, and
those near the surface, disclosing this
vein. The vein is not connected by de-
velopments showing it to be absolutely
continuous, or showing that the parts
of veins disclosed are parts of one vein.
After Mr.. Hayes had described all the
developments, Mr.. Hughes said:
Then developments might show that
this is not all one vein either, and that
the apex map is wrong in delineatfng
it as one vein?"
Yes" said the witness.
The testimony of the witness showed
that there is a change in the dip of the
vein at one point.
Pennsylvania vein No. 2, which runs
up from the 450 level of the mine to the
Harris & Lloyd tunnel, and thence to
the surface, was the next subject CT
discussion. This is in the western part
of the workings in the controverted
ground.
This vein is an important one On
both the plaintiffs and defendants
models it runs up to the tunnel named
on the same dip. If it preserves this
dip, it apexes in the plaintiffs ground:
if, at the tunnel, 1t takes the sleeper
dip that it is represented to take upon
the defendants model, it apexes in the
defendants ground.
The witness testified that it takes the
latter dip at the point named, but the
developments upon 1t at this point are
limited and the matter is left in doubt.
Right here is where YOU settle the
case in favor Of the defendant, on your
model" said Mr.. Hughes.
The witness evaded the question, and
said that the model showed the strike
as he had found it.
IF you continue the dip of No. s vein
up as it is shown west of No. raise,
will it not apex within the decided
ground?" asked Mr.. Hughes.
Il should say it would come within
the Rarus south side line" answered
the witness.
But would it not come within the
decided ground on it's east striker
TT is practically at the surface now,
at the shaft
But mean as it goes east"
The dip changes on the 450 level
ION the 400 level 1t is already inside
the Rarus and Johnstown lines. is it
not?"
1T is just a little south"
TT crosses the line then, does it not?"