The Wallace miner. [volume] (Wallace, Idaho) 1907-current, 1920-06-03

conflicting rights in the Wardner dis.
trict various ore bodies, the Tacom-
smelter and its sale, smelling con-
tracts, present personnel and pictures
of the chief characters who have con-
tributed to the success of this great
enterprise. The chapter follows
Through all its vicissitudes the
mine has yielded a nearly uniform
product. The assay value of the ore
has been as follows
Lead Silver
For % years -...---..-.-.-..-l1.2S 4.92
For next years .-..-..,..-1O.O6 1888
For last Z years ...----.....-10.10 1892
The Guggenheims made many eff
forts to get control of the mine.
Among these may be mentioned the
purchase of the Tacoma smelter, the
fanciful salary they paid Mr. Ham
mond, the continuation of Mr. Brad
ley as president of the Tacoma smell
ter and his appointment as manager
of the Federal Mining & Smelling
company as well as direct negotia-
tions for purchase of stock. When
these efforts failed they resorted to
apex litigation, of a persistent and
harrassing kind, over the Republican
Fraction, San Carlos and Viola
claims their suits being brought
through Charles Sweeney through
the Empire State company and
through the Federal Mining & Smelt-
ing company over a period extending
from June, 1905, to March, 1910. These
attempts failed to undermine the title
of the Bunker Hill company to it's
property and were discontinued after
March, 1910.
The apex litigation in which the
Bunker Hill enterprise has been in
vOlved is worthy of special consider
alton. In giving an outline of the
successive lawsuits l am indebted to
learned counsel Curtis H. Lindley
who has been the chief adviser to
the company. BY courtesy of Judge
Lindley l am enabled to give a brief
but comprehensive review of this
phase of the Bunker Hill company's
history.
The litigation extended over long
period of years. and involved num-
Der of intricate mining problems, most
of which were entirely new and were
adjudged in these cases for the first
time The earliest case was what is
known as the First Stemwinder. and
in order to understand the problems
involved in the ultimate ruling made
by the courts of last resort, it will be
necessary to review the legal deci-
sions prior to that time in suits
brought by the former owners of adj
joining properties, as the decisions in
these cases were of large import in
the ensuing adjudications.
There was a small area in conflict |
between the Tyler and Last Chance |
At the time the Last Chance applied |
for patent the Tyler company advers- /
ed as to this area in conflict, and in 4
suit to determine the question of /
priority the Tyler company withdrew /
its answer and abandoned it's right to .
the ground in dispute thus establish
ing. so far as those claims are con-
cerned conclusively the priority of
the Last Chance over the Tyler In
a later suit the Tyler company claim
ed that the adjudication as to the
priority of the Last Chance only ap-
piled to the surface but did not af-
feet the underground rights of the
Tyler and that therefore it was at
liberty to relitigate the question so
far as it affected the underground
segments of the vein. This conten-
ton. however, was not sustained, and Il
the courts held that the judgment in
the adverse suit precluded the Tyler
not only as to the surface, but also as
to the underground rights.
About the year 1898 the Bunker Hill {
company commenced a suit against
the Empire State Idaho Mining and
Development company to establish !
the rights of the Stemwinder as
prior claim to the Last Chance. The
trial court limited the Stemwinder Z
extra-lateral right to the south end {
line of the Emma prolonged. In this
case also there was a small triangu-
lar surface conflict between the
Stemwinder and the Last Chance, in
significant in area and of no import
ance whatever so far as the mining
claim was concerned, but the Stem
winder failed to adverse and the con-
flict area was included within the
survey of the Last Chance. The
Stemwinder contended that it was in
fact prior in point of time to the Last
Chance. and that its failure to ad-
verse as to this small triangle only /
deprived it of the surface of the con- Is
flict area, and that it had the right to
show its priority as against the Last
Chance by evidence of the original
locators. The trial court sustained
this contention and enabled the
Stemwinder to prove its priority over
the Last Chance by an hour and
half The circuit court of appeals.
however, reversed this, holding that {
the failure of the Stemwinder to ad- D
verse the Last Chance operated as
conclusive adjudication as to all un- =
/