Daily inter mountain. [volume] (Butte, Mont.) 1881-1901, 1900-10-19
HOW THE LAW STANDS.
Mining Decisions in State and Federal
: Courts.

Where. in an action for the conversion
of ore, an injunction has been issued,
In compliance with which the defend
ant has stored certain ore heretofore,
it is not entitled to have the value of
such ore taken into account in reduction
of damages unless it proves such value,
and returns or tenders the ore to the
h plaintiff. Montana Min. Co. Limited VS..
st. Louis Min. & Mill. Co. of Montana,
1O2 Fed. Rep, U. S., 43O.
Possession of the surface of a mining
claim is possession Of a. vein or lode
having it's apex within the surface lines
of the claim, although, in extending
downward, such vein may pass beyond
the vertical side lines of the claim, and
will support an action for trespass for
the removal of ore from such vein, be-
meath the surface of an adjoining claim.
Same.
A complaint which alleges that plain
tiff is tthe owner of a mining claim, and
of all the precious metals contained in
any vein or lode, through it's entire
depth, whose apex is within the surface
lines of such claim, and that defendant,
the owner of a claim, which adjoins one
of the side lines of plaintiffs. has mined
and removed ore from a vein which has
it's apex in plaintiffs claim, is sufficient,
in the absence of a thereto, to
support a judgment in favor of plaintiff
for the conversion of such ore, although
it does not specifically allege the facts
which show hat the boundary etwee
the claims of the parties is a side line of
plaintiffs claim, beyond which it has
extra lateral rights. Montana Min. Co.,
Limited, VS.. St. Louis Min. & Mill. Co..
of Montana, 1O2 Fed. Rep, U. S., 431.
In compliance with a decree for spe-
cific performance of a contract made be-
tween the owners Of two adjoining min
ing claims in settlement of a suit
brought to determine a disputed bound
airy between them, the owner of one
claim conveyed to the owner of the
other the strip in dispute, together with
all the mineral therein contained, to-
gether with all the dips, spurs n
angles, and also all the metals, ores,
gold and silver bearing quartz rock, n
ance la no other effect than to fix the
surface boundary between the two
claims in accordance with the original
contention of the grantee, and did not
deprive the grantor of any extralateral
rights under the ground so conveyed;
such boundary being a side line of it's
claim. Same.
In constructing the notice of location
of a mining claim there is no rule of
necessity, such as exists in the con-
struction of deeds which requires that
the terms "easterly" and westerly"
used without qualifying language, shall
denote due east and west.
A notice of location of a mining
claim, which gives the curse of the
location as running a certain distance
in a westerly n easterly direction
from the point of discovery until the
boundaries are definitely located by
monument, reserves from entry by sub
,sequent locators the surface area which
might be included in n location so
made that if a line be drawn length
wise through the center of the claim
from the west center end thereof
through the point of discovery TO the
east center enc thereof said line will be
east, As deg. north, and east, As deg.
south from the point of discovery.
/ If a locator of a mining claim, when
posting his notice of location, in addition
to giving the general course Of his vein,
places his at the center Of
each end thereof, thus giving deinit
notice to subsequent locators as to the
meaning of his notice, he is bound
thereby, and cannot thereafter, during
the time prescribed by law for perfect
ing his location to the prejudice of in
,tervening rights.