Court Opinion

ID: 9417114
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-02 20:03:41.991715+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:42:08.352801
License: Public Domain

•Mb. Justice Bradley,
dissenting.
The question intended to be raised in this case is, whether the grants made by the United States of placer mines, as such, involve the right to discharge the refuse earth and gravel produced by working said mines, called “ tailings,” into the neighboring streams, in this case Bear River, inasmuch as the mines cannot be worked except by means of a discharge of the streams of water loaded with such refuse. This question depends upon' the construction of the titles given by the United States. When the government determined to sell mining property as such, and placer mines eo nomine, did it, or did it not, intend to confer a, right of working them in the only way in which they could be worked ? It seems to me that the question is clearly raised by the’ allegations of the petition in this case; and the claim of, ■ the right is clearly made. Whether it can be maintained as against the occupants of inferior lands in the vallej^s which may be injured thereby is another question, not now before us. I think the parties were entitled to a removal of the cause.