Elk City mining news. (Elk City, Idaho) 1903-1913, 1904-06-04
Important Legal Decisions.
Continued from first Page.

vein to reach 1t. IhlS is Ine law do III
terpreted by the Supreme Court OF the
United States, and the decision ABOVE
noted indicates that the court intends
to live up to the esprit and the letter
of the law" 1t seems like hardship
upon the owner of a mine in which
there are several veins, as is not un-
common in many places. AS notable
instance may be mentioned the Key
stone mine in Amador county, Cal,
where there are five distinct veins with
in short distance of each other, all OF
which have been extensively worked,
mostly through two shafts sunk on one
of them, the other veins being reached
by crosscuts. If the letter of the law
must be observed, it is as reasonable to
require that a shaft must be sunk
throughout its depth directly in or upon
the vein, though in it's dip the vein in
its downward course may be so sinuous
as to make numerous changes of angle
in the shaft-a condition at once eXpen-
sive and undesirable. All miners prefer
straight shaft, and in the case of an
inclined shaft sunk in straight align
ment and at uniform angle it may
have the vein on the hanging wall side
part of the way, and part of the way
on the foot, and it may be partly in the
vein. An instance may be mentioned
where an inclined shaft starts in the
hanging wall country rock 60 feet dis
tant from the vein on the surface. The
shaft, being sleeper than the vein, cuts
it between 300 and 400 feet. From that
point to the 1000-foot level the vein lies
in the hanging wall, and at one place
the vein is at least 100 feet from the
shaft in the hanging and far beyond the
boundary of the claim. There are many
things in the mining law which seem to |
require REIMBURSEMENT, but none more so
than that of the eXtralatteral right.
A third interesting decision has been
handed down by the Supreme Court of
the United States in the case of the 7
Clipper Mining Co., plaintiff in error,
VS.. the Eli Mining & Land Co. ct al
In this case placer claim was located |
in 1877 within what are now the limits
of the city of Leadville, Colo The fol-
lowing year the locators applied for pa
tent. The application was adversed and
patent denied, on the grounds that the
land was not in fact placer ground. La
ter a second application for patent to a
somewhat smaller tract of the same
land was made, which was rejected bv
the Commissioner of the General Land
Office, and his decision was affirmed bv
the Secretary of the interior. Suisse
quently-in November, 1890-four lode
claims were staked on the alleged pla,.
Ger claims, on which the owners had
regularly performed assessment work
The owners of the four lode locations
applied for patent, when defendants
in error-the owners of the placer loca-
tion-filed an adverse claim. Judgment
was rendered for plaintiff by the Dis
trict Court Of Lake county, Colo. which
Judgment was affirmed by the Supreme
Court of Colorado. Thereafter writ
Of error was sued out and the case went
% the Supreme Court of The United
States, which decides that when reject
ng the application for patent to the
placer claim, as neither the land Office
he Commissioner nor the Secretary Of
he Interior declared the location of the
placer claim void, the claim remained
n force and was valid-even though the
and Office may still set aside the claim {
lpon notice and restore the land to the 7
'ublic domain. But it has not done So Z
nd, therefore, it is useless to consider
What rights other parties might then
ave. The court says: Our conclusion.
therefore,, is that one may not go upon 7
prior valid placer location to prospect
or unknown lodes and get title to lode 7
laims thereafter discovered and loca- I
ed III this manner, and within the pla-
Ell boundaries, unless the placer owner
as abandoned his claim, valves the
'espass, or by his conduct is estopped 7
complain OF 1t. Under the an A
lorities, prostector may not enter A
pom prior placer location for the mr.
ose OF prospecting for, or locating I'M
nown lodes or veins; and to uphold the
ldgment we must presume that the
'idence before the trial court showed Z.
lat the veins or lodes upon which de-
'ndants' grantors based their locations T
ere unknown when they entered unon =
le Scarf placer for the purpose of pros
scting.'
L.