The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1899-08-16

titled to mine the whole of the vein,
notwithstanding the fact that the apex
of a portion thereof lies within the Sno-
homish lode, as above described.
The precise question involved in this
case was deliberately treated and deter
mined by the supreme court of the
United States in the case of the Del
Monte Mining and Milling company
VS.. Last Chance Mining and Milling
company. reported in volume ILL., United
States reports, at page 50, to the effect
that the owner of a lode mining claim
is entitled to that portion of all veins or
lodes, the apex of which is within the
boundary lines of his claim. and is en-
titled to follow the same in their down
ward course. although they dip outside
of the side lines of such claim and al
though the vein in its strike or course
crosses one end line and one side line
of the claim of such proprietor mining
claim.
SO that il follows in this case that
the defendants are entitled to mine and
extract the ore found within that por-
ton of the vein extending from where
the vein enters the Snohomish mining
claim at the southerly side line to
where it departs from the claim at the
westerly end line Il distance, as shown
by the evidence. of % feet, although it
departs in its downward course into
the Michael Dewitt lode claim, and that
the defendants ought to be enioined
from mining any other portion OF the
vein.
There was also some contention on
the part of the defendants as to what
should be considered the westerly end
line of the Snohomish lode claim We
do not perceive that there can be any
dispute on that subject. as the end lines
of every valid lode claim must be paral-
lei and the same appears to be the case
in respect to the Snohomish lode claim.
al the area in controversy, although the
claim is to some extent irregular in its
outlines. the northwesterly boundary of
the claim being defined by a line eX-
tending northeast and southwest, evil
IDENTIFY being the parallel end line of an
adjoining claim and running diagonaly
to the true parallel westerly end line
of the Snohomish lode, which is crossed
by the strike of the vein above de-
sCribed Counsel for defendants, in his
argument, contended that the line
bounding the northwest portion of the
SnOhomish lode claim should be pro-
jected to point where it crosses the
strike of the lode and would thereby
give to the Snohomish claim greater
length of apex, but that would be clear
~ erroneous. because it would destroy
the parallelism of the end lines of the
Snohomish lode claim and would in
wade the surface area conceded to be-
long to the owners of the Michael Dewitt
lode.
1T is therefore ordered that the de-
PENDANTS be enjoined and restrained,
pending the final determination of this
action, from mining and extracting any
ores and mineral from said vein other
than such as may be found within the
area bounded by the planes of the
westerly end line of the Snohomish
lode, as above described, and a line
parallel with the end line crossing the
southerly side line of the Snohomish
lode claim at a point % feet easterly
from the southwest corner of the said
Snohomish lode extended downwsrds.'
In the Minnie Healey controversy. in
which Miles Finlen is plaintiff and r.
Aug. Heinze and Others are defendants,
the following order was made:
This is an action in the nature of
ejectment by which plaintiff seeks to
recover from defendants possession of
that certain lode mining claim known
as the Minnie Healey. The plaintiff al
leges that on certain date, stated in
his complaint, he was in possession and
| entitled to the possession of the prop
| erty under certain leases and agree
| ments to sell and convey to him the
| premises, and that on that date the de-