Daily inter mountain. [volume] (Butte, Mont.) 1881-1901, 1899-12-28
Judge Clancy Renders Decision
in Famous Suit Today.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Plaintiffs Entitled to Follow Dips of
Veins in Rarus and Johns
town Claims.

Jay in the Pennsylvania mine vein suit,
nd F. Augustus Heinze and the Mon
ana Ore Purchasing company are the
timers, the court deciding that they
8 plaintiffs are entitled to follow the
lip of the veins within the Rarus and
Ohnstown claims to their entire depth.
md that the defendant company shall
e enjoined and restrained from work.
lg the lower portion of it.
The defendants attorneys took an ex-
option to the decision and the matter
ill probably find it's way into the state
lprene court II hence to a higher
'ibunal. 1t is also likely that the plain
ifs will now institute a big damage suit
gainst the defendant for ore taken from
he vein in the past. 1t is rumored that
ne stock deal between the Boston &
[ontana company and Amalgamated
F~ockholders, which has been in the bal
nee for several weeks, hinges to a great
ktent on this decision.
Judge Clancy first gives his findings
fact, which cover about the entire sit
alton. The findings of law are based
pom the findings of fact and are given
full.
The title of the suit was the Montana
re Purchasing company against the
oston & Montana Mining company,
Id the bone of contention was he
lin of the Pennsylvania mine, which
e defendant has been working for sew
al years. A year or two ago the plain
re claimed to have made the discovery
at the vein of the Pennsylvania, owned
the defendant, had it's apex within
be lines OF HI Rarus and Johnstown
aims, owned by the plaintiff, and under
ecisiOns of other courts in similar cases
reclaimed itself the owner of this vein.
nit to decide title to it followed. and in
le trial OF the cause III of the most
btable rock sharps, engineers and GEN
al all-round mining men in the United
fates gave testimony for one side or the
her. Judge Clancy has had the mat
y under Amusement and has done some
ork on it every day since he returned
ON his annual bear hunt in the Big
ole mountains. In view of the fact
at the property is one Of the most
Foli1c mines owned by the Boston &
Ontana company, the suit was one of
e greatest of its class EVER tried in
lver Bow county.
The conclusions follow:
The court finds as conclusions of law
bun the foregoing facts that the plain
q is now and was at the time Of the
mlnencelnent OF this action and for 4
Eg time prior thereto had been the
|ner in possession n entitled to the
session of said parcel of ground si,u-
ed within the JohnstOwn lode claim,
ID particularly described in the conf
Rint and in these findings ami IF al
es and metals therein contained, and ali
ms, lodes, lodges and mineral deposits
wing their tops Or apices therein, to-
thnr Wi h oil tn,aiys lipc -, a,,1
giles throughout their entire depth;
thin planes, one parallel with the end
es of the ~Johnstown claim drawn YER
ally through a point on the south side
e of the Johnstown lode claim, Let
294 feet westerly from the southeast
rner of said claim, and extended in its
n direction to an intersection with the
tside portions of said veins: the other
avn through the west boundary line of
pintiff's parcel of ground designated in
e description as south rs degrees 40
nutes west 235 feet. extended in its
m direction to an intersection with a
Ane drawn down from the surface
rough the west end line OF said Johns
vn lode claim, extended in it's own di-
etiOn to the south. and then following
id plane to the south, said plane being
tended as aforesaid to an intersection
tn the exterior portions of said veins,
IDS, lodes, lodges and mineral deposits,
u Is cIhtltleu no enter the YOUNGSTOWN
lie claim, the Snow Bird lode claim, the
nnsylvania lode claim, and the ground
the south thereof beneath the surface
d to pursue and mine the ore from said
ms, leads. lodes. lodges and mineral de-
sits, from their tapices downward.
rOughout their entire depth, within the
mes above mentioned, as well above
? lowest of the levels and workings
de therein as below the same, and that
defendant has no right or title to the
nle or any of them. or to the parcel
ground described in said complaint,
4 that the plaintiff is entitled to a de-
be establishing its rights and owner
~.