Daily inter mountain. [volume] (Butte, Mont.) 1881-1901, 1900-02-03

having some tendency to show that this
is fact. This correlation theory is simply
inference or conclusion from the facts
presented and testified to. Should it Be
found that the facts were not as now
supposed by the plaintiff, then this in
ference would be changed. If the facts
do not justify the conclusion reached in
this matter of correlation, then it amounts
to nothing in the case. This is a question
for you to determine"
The court reviews the contention Of the
defense hat the Windlass vein had not
lost it's identity by reason of the faults,
or any of the other veins found east and
west of them, and the contentious Of the
plaintiff that the ore bodies in the fault
regions show from their strike and dip
that they are not combinations of the ores
on either side. n that the ore bodies
crossing through form angles like the
crossed arms of a sawbuck. HI court
referred to the theory Of the plaintiff that
the fiat ore body was not in it's original
position, but mad been moved by the
movement upo the faults and could not
be identified as coming from any partic-
ular vein that had been interrupted by
the faults. He told the jurors that if they
found the plaintiffs theory in that respect
to be correct they should find the ore
bodies between the faults to be separate
and distinct from the Windlass vein.
Though there may be practical continue
ity at some point or points," he said, yet
If it lacks identity there cannot be a con-
nection made through the faulted country
from the Rarus and Johnstown premises
into the Michael Dewitt, no matter how
continuous the ore may be-"
The court then proceeded with the dis
cussion of lodes and their definitions and
continued:
'There has been some evidence to the
effect that the ground lying between
the east and west fault is itself a lode,
and thus requires of me to define to you
what a lode is.
1.-The definition of a lode given by JUS
tice Field in the opinion in the Eureka
case has been referred to by the attor-
neys in this case; that definition is as
follows:
ga fissure in the earth's crust, an
opening IN its rock or strata, made by
some force of nature, in which the min
eral is deposited, would seem to be es-
sential to a lode in the judgment OF
biologists, but to the practical miner the
assure and it's walls are only Of impor-
lance as indicating the boundaries within
which he may look for and reasonably
expect to find the ore he seeks. A con-
tinuous body of mineraliZed rock lying
within any we'll defined boundaries on the
earth's surface and under it would equal
ly constitute, in his eyes, a lode. The
tenn as used in the act of congress is ap-
plicable to any zone or belt of mineraIized
rock lying between boundaries clearly
separating it from the neighboring rock.
1t includes deposits of mineral matter
found through the mineralized zone or
belt, coming from the same source, i'm
pressed with the same forms and appear
ing to have been created by the same pro-
cesses.'
You will observe that in this defin-
ition the lode must ave boundaries and
it must be such a formation as a prac-
tical miner would follow with the sea-
sonable expectation of finding the ore he
seeks. Now, it is a question for the
jury to determine as to whether the for
nation between the east and west fault
Or transverse fissure. is such as a prac-
teal miner would follow with the rea-
sonable expectation of finding ore.
| I'm considering this definition in the
Eureka case. l think it is proper for the
jury to know hat are the facts that
confronted the court in that case:
"Lead-silver ore was found within ths
body of a mass of dolomfte or metamor-
phic lime rOck-that is. dock which has
been changed by some force or process OF
nature from it's ~,undOubted original con-
dltion as a stratiHed lime rock: this lime
rock was enclosed on one side by a body
OF quartzite and on the other side by Q
body of shale and unaltered lime rock
the court held that this body of changed