The Ogden standard. [volume] (Ogden City, Utah) 1902-1910, 1909-04-26
SALT LAKE AND
STATE NEWS
RAIL ROAD IS LOSER
To MINING COMPANY
Section of Land in Controversy Held
to Be Mineral in Character.

Tribune: Col NJ. NJ Kaighn. reg
lster OF the United States land of
ice, rendered an important decision
relative 10 the case OF the United
states. the Morgan Argentine Mining
company, and others against the Union
Pacific Railroad company. on Satur-
day afternoon in which the railroad
company Is the loser.
The suit was brought for the pur.
pose of compelling the railroad COM
pany to give up certain land 1t had
selected and which was claimed TO be
grazing land. According to the rec
ords in the United States land Of
flee, the railroad company selected.
among other lands. all OF section 49,
township north range east. sit
uated in Morgan county On MAY Is.
1905. the Morgan Argentine Mining
company. Of which Adrian b. Penn
broke OF Salt Lake City Is president,
filed In the land office protest. alleg
ing that the land in question was
mineral land and that the selection of
the railroad was In conflict with the
mining rights OF the Morgan Argen-
tine company After the protest had
been sent TO the general land office.
a hearing was ordered To determine
the true character of the land In 1ues-
tion
1t was at this point that Mr.. Penn.
broke went to Mr. MacallIster who
was commissioner of the land depart
ment OF the Union Pacific Railroad
company, with offices at Omaha, and
notified him that the ground would
be proven to be mineralized IL exam
ined by any honorable and competent
man selected by the railroad company.
Mr. Pembroke wished TO prove TO tho
company that the land was mineral
lied without recourse to a lawsuit,
with its delays and expense.
All oyertures on the part OF the min
Ing company were ignored and hear
ingS were had before the government
officials. which resulted in the Morgan
Argentine Mining company being nl-
lowed TO take out a patent. But the
case did not como to rest at this
point. there being other mining claims
involved. The owners of these did
not seem interested enough to defend
the title of the government to the
grounds and II was To prove the status
of these and other mining claims In
the section that the case was called
by the government,
At this point trial was ordered and
the case set for hearing on February
II, 1908. Then followed a series of
continuances until March Is, 1909. All
of the evidence was submitted and
the case closed on March Is, 1909
Following Is Il portion of the decision:
The testimony in this case is con
flicung. Some reputable witnesses
testified that the land has little or no
value as mineral land. On the other
hand. large number of equally rep
utable and competent witnesses tes-
tify that 1t is rough, rugged and pre-.
cipitious, OF little value for grazing,
but Is of decided value as mineral
land and that It abundantly justifies
the expenditure of the necessary eX.
pense TO develop the indications OF
mineral which appear In the rocks on
the surface: that considerable sums
of money have already been expend-
cd in cuts. tunnels and shafts which
show ores OF lead carrying gold and
silver. that the principal wit
ness for the defendant railroad com
pany that Claims that the land is
more valuable for grazing than for
mining pur. ,es, Is an officer and man
ager OF a mining company,
and although he claims to have
puchaed portion of sec
tion 10 from the railroad company
as grazing land indicates by his tes-
timony that he desires to secure the
land for its mineral rather than It's
grazing value.
I'VE are of the opinion that the
great weight of the testimony estab
fishes that the land has very little
value for grazing purposes, and that
its principal value Is as mineral land,
and so decide. and we recommend the
cancellation of said selection to the
extent of the land described in the
caption hereof