The Wallace miner. [volume] (Wallace, Idaho) 1907-current, 1920-05-27
U. S. COURT OF APPEALS
REVERSEs LOWER COURT.
CONTINUED from Page u

DEFENDANT was that the work dom
! and the ore extracted by it from be
meath the surface of the Evening Sta
and Mary r. Fraction claims was up
on a vein which apexed within it
lGrouse and Iron Crown claims, cross
ing their lines in such a way as con.
ferred upon the defendant the extra.
lateral rights defined by Section 232.
of the Revised Statutes; while the
contention on behalf of the complain
ant was that the vein upon which the
work in question was done and from
which the ore in controversy was ex-
tracted was broad lode bisected
upon. the surface by the common side
line of the Evening Star and Grouse
and by the common side line of the
Evening Star and the Iron Crown
claims and that as to both. the Grouse
and Iron Grown the Evening Star
claim has priority and therefore car
ried the ownership of all of the ore of
the lode or vein beneath the surface
of the Evening Star and Mary r.
Fraction to the west end line of the
Evening Star
Decision of Lower Court.
The court below adjudged and de-
creed, among other things that by
virtue of its ownership of the Grouse
and Iron Crown claims the defendant
is the owner of the vein in contro-
versy and entitled to the possession
thereof; that the hanging wall or
northern limit of the said vein to the
extent that it has been worked verti-
cally beneath the surface of the Eve
ming Star, Evening Star Fraction and
Mary r. Fraction claims, is five feet
northerly from the existing levels,
winzes raises nclines. and slopes
heretofore excavated by the defend
ant in it's workings beneath the sur
face of said claims:' that the Grouse
claim was located prior to the loca-
ton of any of the compliments said
claims and is senior in date of loca-
ton and superior in mining rights ac-
cruing by reason thereof over any
and all of the said claims of the COM
plainant; that the Iron Crown claim
was located prior to the location of
the Evening Star Fraction and Mary
r. Fraction claims and subsequent to
the location of the Evening Star claim
and is superior in mining rights ac-
eruing by reason of location to said |
Evening Star Fraction and Mary r. /
Fraction claims. and inferior to the |
Evening Star claim. and further ad-
Il, g
he complainant and of all persons
or to claim by. through or
inder it, to any portion of the vein !
idjudged by the decree to be the |
of the defendant, are invalid |
md groundless and that the defend
md to all ores and minerals therein
contained be quoted against the
and perpetuallv enioin-
ng it from asserting any claim there
o, or from entering into or upon any /,
portion thereof.
The court found that the decision
# the case did not require the deter
of the limits of the vein to
he south, and accordingly did not
Undertake to fix them-the dip being !
{
Morning Vein. {
ut is undisputed that from a lode
he apex of which crosses the east t
ne of the Morning claim of the de- q
endant, about 200 feet from its north {
asst corner. and running thence west q
rly towards its southwest corner. an c
ggregate amount stated to be from +
to 80 million dollars had been TAX {
4 during the many years it had been
orked. prior to the commencement {
the present suit. That the defend Il
ut was then pursuing the same lode "
syond the west end line of the Nor =
ng claim, and extracting ore there
ON beneath the surface of the Eve a.
ng star and Mary r. Fraction II
aims of the complainant, we can but CO
include from a most careful consid- W
alton of the evidence in the case. ~
I'VE do not of course, overlook the az
sistence of the defendant that the q
e extracted by it from beneath the We
rface of the compliments claims is DC
part of the vein apexing within the o'
of the Grouse and Iron q
own claims of defendant. That the ar
rned trial judge was not entirely IN
listed with the conclusions reached ed
him to that effect clearly appears, an
think, from his opinion" III
Vein Boundaries. Mi
The difficulty and necessity of es- pc
Fishing definite width to the vein
quoted from the decision of the We
'er court and the complicated TO
sstion is emphasized by a liberal SID
'tatiOn from the testimony of Prof Or
rrell of Yale. witness for the de- or
dant Following these. the opinion tbs
s: ella
The great Eureka lode of Nevada am
reka Case, Sawy S12 many ext
es referred to in subsequent cases)
) bounded on its south side by a.
] of quartzite several hundred feet 1851
and on its north side by sta
elt of clay or sSale ranging in the
'kness from less than an inch to FL
Or so feet. Not so in the present ally
,