Bisbee daily review., 1908-09-26
COURT PASSES
ON QUESTION
ASSESSMENT
Good Faith in Working Claim
Counts. Contract Price Mot
a Fair Estimate of va71e of
Work Done.

Among the decision handed dowr
by Judge Nave in Globe last week in
The district court was a decision, In
the case OF Porter Ys Wallace, which
is OF great interest TO mine owners IN
this territory In that it CONSTITUTES tae
requirements of the federal and terri.
torlal Law as TO what work shall be
deemed sufficient annual expenditure
upon or for the benefit of an unpat-
ented mining claim to save the claim
from forfeiture,
The federal statute on this subject
is as follows: On each claim located
after the tenth day or May, 1872, ana
until patent has been issued there
for, not less than one hundred dollars
worth of labor shall be performed or
improvements made curing each
year
AT the trial OF this case, the testi-
mony was substantially as follows.
That the plaintiff. George E. Porter,
had worked upon the two claims an
average Of eight hours a day for fifty
three days, besides furnishing supplies
and material; that, during this time,
he had accomplished in actual sinking
In winze twelve to fourteen feet
deep. six by nine feet.
IL was contended by Wallace, VINO
was relocator, that the value of the
labor. as shown by the actual number
OF feet OF work accomplished, was not
sufficient to meet the requirements of
the statute. upon the theory that this
work could be contracted TO be per
formed for SO to s12 foot.
The plaintiff, on the other hand,
contended that, under the adverse
Nd e.. ~ 1.lG
was compelled to do all the work him
self, he could not accomplish more
than three or four inches a day, ana
that, having actually worked fifty
three days, and furnished the neces-
sary supplies, he should be entitled
TO be allowed the value OF his work
measured by the time he was actually
employed in performing the work
together with the cost or the neces-
sary supplies.
The court, upon these facts, held
that while the actual work accomplish
ed should be considered in determin-
ing whether or not SUFFICIENT annuar
expenditure had been made to hold
the claims, it was not the only method
of arriving at this determination; that
the statute did not provide that the
one hundred dollars worm of labor to
be performed or improvements made
upon claim during eacn year should
be measured by the amount of labor
performed in feet, but that, if one man
working upon a mining claim labored
a sufficient number of days. in good
faith, for the purpose of performing
his annual labor, TO save the claim
from forfeiture, he would be entitled
to receive pay for his labor for the
number Of days actually consumed by
him in its performance; that any
other construction of the statute |
would work a gross injustice upon a |
single claim owner who had no means
TO employ assistance-this for the |
reason that it is a well known fact
that two men working together in a |
shaft or Wine can perform three or |
four times the amount of work that |
one man. working alone. can perform |
in the same character of ground.
Il must not be supposed from this |
decision that a claim owner can hold
his claim from forfeiture by doing de- |
sultory work during a number of days |
the total of which at $3.50 or 81 a day |
would amount to 500, but the mean |
ing of the decision is that, If the re- |
suit of labor performed shows the |
good faith OF the owner of the claim |
and his intention to comply with the |
statute, the value OF the labor will be
measured solely by the value per foot !
for which the work might be contract
ed to be performed, provided, that |
the work is performed IN a manner
which is beneficial to the claim ana |
tends to its improvement
The plaintiff in this case was rep
resented by the firm of Stoneman &
Jacobs.