The Cordova daily times., 1921-11-12
SATURDAY, NOVEMBER l2, 1921
IMPORTANT MINING DECISION

\ decision recently handed down by the Cir cult court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, sitting at San Francisco, is one of the utmost importance to both miners and claim owners, in that it settles definitely the question as to what constitutes notice under the territorial law of the non-IiabiIity of the claim owner as against wages due miners working on a mine which has been leased from other parties.
 The case which was originally decided in the district court for the Third division in favor of the miners, was appealed to the cir cult court, and one of the principal points in issue was the sufficiency of the notice of non liability.
 At the original trial of the case it was held that certain machinery used in connection with the mining operations, owned by tn" clam owner and not by the rasce, was not exempt from the lien of the miners because such ma chinrrv did not have posted thereon notice hv the owner of non liability. lt was admitted that such notices were posted in thre" consplc- nous places about the mine, one of winch was llpon the building in which the machinery was located, but mo such notice was posted upon any of the machinery In the lower court Il was held that these notices were sufficient only a~ 1o the buildings, etc., upon winch t|"N were posted. and the land amd that It become "I. factivc a, to the machinery it was necessary that notices should be posted upon each piece ot machinery.
 In the circuit court, however, this decision met with d radical reversal. It was hrId that notices, as posted, contained warning ol tn" fact that the mine was being operated under Icasc the notices rccitin@, as required by the lien law. that the lease was of record i'll of flee of the United States Commissioner at Nal- deg. in a stated volume and at a glV"n page, and that its owners would not be responsible for any claim of wages incurred by the lcssces. Ii was held by the higher court that this was sufficient notice to employees of the lessee that the owners were not responsible for their wages and that with such notice before them it was the duty of miners before accepting cm- pIoymcnt to ascertain just what part of tn" property belonged to the lessor and what to the lessee and that tn" property of tn" lessor nndcr the circumstances, could not be held for thc debts of the lessee
 The irn-c called for the payment to the les sor of twelve and one-half per cent of all gold or other valuable metal extracted from the mine. Al the time of the action in the lower court. there was in the banks at Valdez, a 
 taken from the property. which was attached bv the lien claimants. If was held that the claim of the workmcn was prior lien upon all of the gold extracted In this also the cir cuit court does not agree with the decision of the lower court II holds that the twelve and a half per cent of the gold due the lessor was never in the possession of the lessee or the mon working under him, but that the title always remained in the lessor through its title to the ground and that the bank was merely trus tee for both parties.
 The substance of the decision is this; The lien law provides that a lessor of mining pro perty may protect his interests from liens for labor performed for the lessee if he records copy of the lease in the recording office of the percinct and posts upon the ground in three conspicuous places notice that the lease is