Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1905-10-11
The Former WOA a Complete
Victory In the Decision OF
The Supreme Court
JUDGE BARTCH'S OPINION.
How Trouble Started 49, SiveropOis
Claim Involved A Hard Fought
Legal Battle,


The case had been In the courts FOR
q little more than six years and It was
one Of the hottest contested legal hat
ties ever fought in Utah IN which
valuable mining property was involved.
The effect Of the decision. which
wos written by Chief Justice Geo W,
Rartch and concurred I'm by his as
sOciates. Justices McCarty and Straup,
Is 10 give the Grand Central company
the portion Of the ledge that has been
In dispute and which was awarded to
II by the ruling Cf the lower court,
The latter rs also sustained I'm its re-
fusal TO permit the Mammoth company
to set up new Apex theories on the
opinion of the Judge Of the lower court
that two lodges instead Of one existed
and that, had the Mammoth company
presented It's case differently. IL might
have stood some chance, The decision
simply means that tho Grand Central
has won hands down,
The opinion Is a yoluminous AFFAIR,
containing about 1000 words.
I'm the original complaint the Grand
Central company alleged that the
Mammoth had trespassed upon the
SilyCropolis claim aud taken ores Of
the value OF $500 900 The Mammoth
company alleged In its answer that
the ore bodies We're In a vein, the apex
Of which was in the first northerly eX-
tension Of the Mammoth lode, and
that It was entitled to it on It's dip for
a length corresponding 10 1 100 feet on
the surface Of the Extension claim and
on down through the Grand Centrals
SllVer0polls aud ConsOrt claims, AT
the same time the Mammoth company
filed counter claim against the Grand
Central for s25O,00O damages for ore
extracted by the latter from the same
lode.
The case was tried and decided IN Ia
vor of the Grand Central and the de-
fcrdants counter claim was dismissed
The evidence NJ the trial caused the
Judge to form an opinion of his own
as regarded the ledge formation, but
as 1t had not been brought out or
made a part Of the pleadngs IN the
case Il carried no weight In his de-
termination Of the case. Judge Thorn
as MnrloneuuX, the trial Judge, stated
that IN his opinion there we're two
lodges and that the one I'm conflict prob
ably had It's apex IN the defendants
Golden King and Bradley claim and
not In the Northern Extension Of the
Mammoth, and that, had the action
been properly brought the Mammoth
llllEll nave ItNuNFltl uNllltktT.
As q result OF that the Mammoth
company asked leave TO amend fits
counter claim to meet the view of the
court. That phase Of the litigation was
then thrashed out and the court refused
20 grant the petition OF the Mammoth.
An appeal was taken to the supreme
court it being agreed by both sides
that the question of damages should
be left for later determination,
JUDGE BARTCHS OPINION.
Justice Bartch, after sumlng up what
had been done by the lower court, con-
tinued:
Whether tho court erred IN finding
that the vein mentioned in the counter
claim Of the Mammoth, and upon
which trial was had, at its apex and on
it's strike, left lot IS (the north Mann
moth extension at a point 600 feet
north of the side line Of that lot.
2.-Whether the court erred In refus-
ing OF permit the defendant 10 file the
amendment 10 It's couner claim and in
refusing to permit the fling OF Its prof
fered original counter claim, in each OF
which Il was alleged that the vein
found at the south end Of lot 80 did, at
lts apex and on It's strike, wholly de-
part from that lot at the point found
that point was IN the Golden King and
Bradley.
IAN other questions are subordinate
to and In support Of one or tho other
of these two" the court holds.
After going into the evidence OF the
case very minutely ana after quoting
authorities and portions OF the evidence
submitted ut the various hearings, JUS
tlce Bartch draws his conclusions and
sums up his ruling as follows;
III, after operations have been con-
Quoted by appellants for moro than a
quarter Of a century and by II and It's
predecessors for more than thirty years,
and after oil these preparations from
| these protracted trials, tho appellant
| rs yer so uncertain az 70 where Is the
| apeS OF the vein through which II
! claims the ore bodies in dispute u.s.
that at the mere suggestion of the trial
Judge. without proof to warrant the
suggestion, IL IS willing to abandon its
former position that tho apex Is In lot
| 49, and change it TO the Golden King
and Bradley, showing that II Is yet un-
| able to say where, then surely its theo-
~ would form an unsafe basis upon
which to found Judgment,
Upon careful examination Of this
subject we entertain no doubt that the
profferod amendment was made, as tie
record disclOses, not 20 conform TO the
proof. but. ls we have said, 10 conform
| to the views expressed by the judge.
aud that he very properly refused TO let
II be fled.
"It is wholesome rule that one shall
| not be- permitted % Hugatc his case by
pieCemcal and one necessary 20 the
proper administration of justice. The
appellant having founded its claim 20
D o D.. l. "a