The Alaska citizen., 1910-12-05

vs Tom Lloyd et al. is reproduced. The case was concluded last Tues day. after being on trial for several days. and the Court found in favor of the plaintiffs.
 This is an action to quiet title to quartz lode mining claim. situated on the' left limit of Chatham creek. tributary 10 Cleary creek. in the Fairbanks Recording Precinct, Fourth Judicial Division. Alaska; alleged to have been made on October 4th, 1908. by the plaintiffs and their predecessors in interest.
 The plaintiffs claim. by reason of their said location, the possession and right 10 the possession of 150o feet along the vein. and 300 feet on each side of the same. They further allege that the defendants claim some right 10 a portion of their location and deny their rights thereto.
 The defendants answer, claiming that they and their predecessors in interest made tunnel site lOca. tion. on the same limit of Chat ham creek. on October 7th, 190S. or three days after plaintiffs made their alleged quartz location. They admit that they have crossed the north side line of the Rex claim while running their tunnel. known as the Butler-Petree tunnel.
 The defendants then affirmativel, allege that they are entitled to the ground in question. along the line of their tunnel. by reason of their location. and the fact that the Rex location Is null and void; the de fendants alleging the Rex location invalid for the reason that there was not a discovery of mineral bear ing rock in place and that the Rex location was not sufficiently marked upon the ground, on October |. 1908, so that its boundaries could be read fly traced.
 The reply was filed denying the affirmative matter set out in the an swer
 Under the pleadings and evidence produced at the trial. the question arose. and the decisOn of the case rested, upon whether the Rex To- cation was a valid and subsisting one on October :. 1908. when the defendants made their alleged tun nel site location.
 The court in it's decision stated the law thereon to be as follows: John l.. McGinn, A R. Heilig and
 Leroy Tozier, attorneys for plain
 tiffs.
 John A, Clark and Jos H. Bullock
 attorneys for defendants.
 Overfeld District Judge-Under the peadings and evidence in this case, there is raised the validity of the Rex lode location, the plain tiff claiming to have made a valid location on the 4th day of October 1908. and prior to the intervention of any rights of the defendants, in cluded within the boundaries of the Rex lode mining claim.
 The defendants allege their right to the ground along their tunnel To- cation, within the limits allowed by the statute. by reason of the loca tion of the Butler.Petree tunnel made on October 7th, 1908. or three days after the alleged date of To- cation of the Rex lode mining claim They would justify their tunnel To- cation at the latter date on the ground that the Rex lode mining claim was not a valid location.
 The question raised under the facts and evidence in this case, is the proper and required acts to be done by a locator. under the statute In order to make valid location of a quartz mining claim in Alaska
 The difficulty, if any. in reaching just decision in this action, is not so much what the law demands of the miner and prosDector in mak- ing valid quartz location. as in construing and giving proper weieht and consideration to the evidence which has been produced durine the trial, especially where conflict exists in the same
 take it that the law is generally known bv all hard rock miners and prosDectOrs with reference TO mak- ing valid quartz location: the con flicts arise in construing the now well-known decisions cn the statute In question. To heoin with. the In order to make a valid location of quartz or lode claims contains what seems 10 he short and concise terms Revised Statutes. 239O
 First-The discovery must he made. vein or lode Of quartz or other rock in place, hearing gold silver.
 
 valuable dnnosits:
 Second-NO location of a mininp claim shall he made until the dis covery of vein or lode within the limits of the claim located. and no claim located hv one nercOn shall ey- tend mere than 1 800 feet along the vein or lode. nor more than 3nn feet on each side of the middle of the vein at the surface: the width of the vein may. however. he limit ed, by any mining reeulation. to distance of not less than 25 feet on each side of the middle of ;he vein on the surface, The end lines of each claim shall be parallel to each other.
 However what constitutes a vein. lode or ledge in place is meant bv this statute, and as generally un- derstood bv miners and prosnectors, and the differences of oninion on this branch of the subject of a valid location. evidently was the oc- casion of this suit.
 A vein. lode or ledge, terms used in this opinion svnonvmouslv. means: A body of mineral or mineral bear ing rock. within the defined boundar- les in the general mass of noun tain.
 To constitute such vein, lode or ledge. it is not necessary that 1t he hard or OuartZ rock hut any conn.,