The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1899-09-19
IN JUDGE Ct ANCY'S COURT
Defendants Theories in the Big
Mining Case on Trial.
NEW MAPS AND MODEL
F. 6. Buckley Testifles to the Relative
Age OF Veins and Cross Fis-
sures-Animated Court
Scene.

The big mining suit of the M. o. P.
company against the Boston & Mon
tana, now progressing in Judge Clan
cy's court, has assumed somewhat
new phase through the opening of the
defendants side.
1t Is evident that there are radical
differences between the theory of the
plaintiff and that of the defendant, and
yet unless one has had an opportunity
to listen to the testimony in detail it is
not easy to comprehend the precise
significance of all the points upon
which they differ.
The defense opened with the testi-
mony of Lee Hayes, who is the official
surveyor of the Boston & Montana COM
pany in their litigation, and who has
had, it is understood, general charge
of the development and detail work
connected with the pending litigation
His testimony was illustrated by
model and by series of maps speci-
ally prepared by himself. Opinions diff
fer greatly as to the value of Mr..
Hayes testimony. The cross-examina-
ton lasted several days and was con-
Quoted with much aggressiveness and
Colorado.
1t is clear that the plaintiff feels that
il has scored some advantages through
the statements and admissions of Mr..
Hayes 1t is equally clear that the de-
Tense is we'll satisfied with his testi-
mony so far as it bears upon the ma
terial points in the case. As the rep
resentative of the Standards mining
department did not hear much of the
testimony of Mr.. Hayes, no statement
or synopsis can be given here which
will throw any light upon the ques-
ton of relative advantage.
The defendants model differs greatly
in general appearance from the plain
tiff's and it shows some important diff
ferences with respect to the apexing of
the veins in controversy. Inc maps
are more easily understood.
The plaintiffs map shows three veins
running the entire length of the Johns
town claim and within its side lines.
These veins are represented as connect
ing and apparently crossing near the
center at the claim. Defendants apex
map keeps the veins separate and with
a strike to the southeast which carries
all three of them across the south side
line of the Johnstown into the Rarus,
which also belongs to the plaintiff.
But the most important difference
seems to be that defendants map shows
a fourth vein extending nearly east
and west the whole length of the dis
puted territory but south of the plain
tiff's ground. This is evidently intend
ed to represent the apex of some of the
ore bodies which plaintiff claims apex
in the Johnstown claim. 7.' ~
When Mr. Hayes was finally with
drawn, he was succeeded by f. Il.
Buckley of Colorado. Mr. Buckley pre-
scented himself in very modest way,
but he had not been upon the stand 10
l~zf- nhNrtn ho a
Is man of rare intelligence. What
ever differences of opinion may exist
as to the correctness of his conclusions,
there can be none as to the clearness
of his statements, his perfect self-poise
and the apparent thoroughness of his
knowledge.
Within the disputed grounds there are
strongly mineralzed veins extend
ing east and west with certain cross
assures extending north and south. The
plaintiffs theory is that these cross fis-
sures are older than the veins. Mr..
Buckley denies this. He says that i'll
the matter of priority the geological
sequence was first the granite, second.
the porphyry, third the veins, fourth
the naturalization and fifth the cross
assures. These latter he regards as
simply planes of motion tranSpirine
after the veins had been opened and
mneralzed, and he gives the absence
OF mlneral1ZatlOn IN the cross assures
as reason for believing them to be
subsequent in formation to the veins.
The naturalization resulted, he said,
from aqueous solutions bearing mineral
forced up from below, and if the cross
assures We're there first. the wSter
would have penetrated them and they
should be as fully minerallzed as the
veins, which they were not, he said.
Mr.. Buckley took issue with Mr.. Tow
err with reference to certain specimen
taken from the faults. which Tower had
said was porphyry. Buckley said that
it was not porphyry but merely an in