Cornell Law School Library s Aerie ith sia eee MOM Se Eee THE LAW OF MINES AND MINING IN THE UNITED STATES. By the Same Author: A DESCRIPTION OF MINERALS or COMMERCIAL VALUE. By DANIEL MOREAU BARRINGER. Oblong octavo. Morocco. $2.50. PusBLisHED By JouN Wituy anp Sons, New Yor. THE LAW OF MINES AND MINING THE UNITED STATES. BY DANIEL MOREAU BARRINGER, A.M., LL.B. AND JOHN STOKES ADAMS, A.B., LL.B. OF THE PHILADELPHIA BAR. BOSTON: LITTLE, BROWN, AND COMPANY. 1897. LMU Copyright, 1897, By Danie, Moreau BArRrinceEr, AND Joun Sroxes ADAMS. Aniversity Press : Jonn Witson AND Son, Camerince, U.S.A. TO THe HON. STEPHEN JOHNSON FIELD, Associate Dustice of the Supreme Court of the United States, THIS BOOK IS DEDICATED In Recoenition oF HIS GREAT WORK IN THE DEVELOPMENT AND INTERPRETATION OF THE MinERAL Lanp Law PREFACE. THE law of mines has no logical existetice as a separate branch of jurisprudence, but it is a convenient phrase to comprehend those special rules of law which have been de- duced by the application of general rules to’ the questions that arise as to the rights and duties of miners and mine owners in their relation to the land, to one another, and to those in contact with whom they are brought by reason of the business of extracting the various kinds of valuable minerals from the earth. The aim of this book is to give a complete and accurate statement of these special rules of law, so stated and ar- ranged as to furnish what the authors’ experience has taught them to be the requirements of the active prac- titioner. The authors have refrained from giving their own ideas as to the rules that ought to be adopted, and from criticising the rules that the courts have laid down, except when those tribunals have been so opposed to one another as to make it necessary to express a choice be- tween opposite positions. But they have constantly aimed to state clearly the law as it is to-day, and to furnish the reader with every authority and important dictum in support of the statements contained in the text. The authors have attempted to make this work as com- prehensive as possible, and have not confined themselves viii PREFACE. to the law which is applicable only to any particular por- tion of the country, or to mines of any particular kind. The other American books with which they are familiar are confined to the statutory system under which title to mines is acquired and mining is conducted upon those lands which are or have been a part of the public domain. The present work aims to cover this field fully, and also to deal, with equal completeness, with the questions of title to mineral lands, mines and minerals in those States in which the common law on the subject of real estate owner- ship applies. As the authors are impressed with the fact that a law- yer who undertakes to deal with the legal questions which are submitted to him by mine owners cannot be com- pletely equipped for the task without a certain knowledge of the formation and mode of occurrence in nature of the various kinds of mineral deposits, the work is preceded by a chapter in which these subjects are explained briefly, but, it is hoped, accurately and fully, and under an arrange- ment which is based on the classification of the subject required by the law. The importance of this feature will be especially appreciated by those whose practice requires them to deal with mining properties situated upon the public domain, because in the application of the United States statutes important legal distinctions are intimately connected with geological or physical differences. D. M. BARRINGER. JNO. STOKES ADAMS. PHILADELPHIA, September, 1897. TABLE OF CONTENTS. Pacr TABLE or CasEs ¢ o* » Syil GEOLOGICAL PREFACE ... . . . 1. 6 ew ee we ew li CHAPTER I. Property in MINERALS WHERE THERE HAS BEEN NO DIVISION BETWEEN THE OWNERSHIP OF THE SURFACE AND THE MINERAL Estate. I. Property and Rights of the Owner of the Soil in Minerals which are in Place . 4 II. Property in Minerals which have ‘been severed fr om n the Freehold . 5 III. Property and Rights in the Minerals of Owners of the Soil who have a Limited Estate a Eis hy eee a 7 A. Tenants for Life 8 B. Tenants for Years . ‘ a 15 C. Owners of Equities of Redemplion 2 17 IV. Property and Rights in the Minerals where there are Taint Owners of the Soil . . ewe ee 18 V. Property and Rights i in Mineral Oil ‘and N atural Gas. - i » » 80 CHAPTER II. PRopPeRTY AND RiGHTs IN MINERALS WHERE THE TITLE TO THE MINERALS OR THE RIGHT TO TAKE THEM IS VESTED IN SOME ONE WHO IS NOT THE OWNER OF THE SOIL. I. Estate in Fee Simple in Minerals in Place en “Boke les We yay Watiee af Plena or inci- dent thereto. . . ‘ ee ee ee a « 1293) B. Fixtures and Aneugtennces oer 127 IV. The Subject of the Lease and the Right of of the Lesseo to Mi nerals not enumerated in his Lease . . . j . 180 CHAPTER IV. ASSIGNMENT AND TERMINATION OF LEASE. J. Assignment of the Lease . . . . . « .~ . . . ws. 186 A. Mortgage of Leasehold . . . . «. « «www. s D1 II. Termination of the Lease. . . . . . . ....... 142 A. By Expiration of Term... 1 6 ew ew we ew ww 14D B. By Exhaustion of the Minerals. . . . . . . «. «. « « 145 C. By Eviction... . oo Bece Ghoao ge e y e Ge AE D. By Forfeiture . . bee toa Ge ee we GT E. By Abandonment and Sarnente® eee WED eh ey ce gee OO CHAPTER V. PROPERTY OF THE SOVEREIGN AND ITS GRANTEES IN MINERALS. I. In Mines of the Precious Metals. . . fee Ope wre dS II. In Minerals in the Beds of Navigable Streaine ioe ta) ole ah AD III. In Minerals under Public Highways . . . » 183 IV. In Minerals contained in Lands taken by Erainent Domatn., . . 186 A. Property in the Minerals upon or under the Lands appropriated. 186 B. Mine-owner’s Rights, and Restrictions upon him by Reason of the Exercise of the Dominant Right. Damages for the taking. . 187 TABLE OF CONTENTS. CHAPTER VI. Tue GOVERNMENT’s TITLE AND THE GRANT THEREOF. I. What Land is open to Location as Mineral Land . II. Who may locate a Mining Claim . . A. Citizenship of the United States the Essential Requisite B. Other Qualifications of Locators . : ; C. Location by Agent or Partner CHAPTER VII. DISCOVERY AND LOCATION OF CLAIMS. I. Discovery of Ore. . . Il. Length of Time allowed after Discover ae to perform A Aste of Loca- HOM. ka ke a & ofp 482: III. Location of Claims . A. Marking the Twcntlowe on the Ground B. Notice of Location ; Posting of Notice . C. Record of Location Certificate (a.) Its Nature and Necessity (b.) Contents of the Record . ‘ (c.) Verification of the Certificate . . d (d.) Amendment of the Record. Additional Certificates : (e.) Mistakes in the Record . (£.) Requirements as to the Time vith Place of recording Cert Cale a Oe CHAPTER VIII. Tue Extent oF THE CLAIM. I. Lode Claims . . II. Placer Claims. Bf ee III. Cases arising prior a the Act of 1872 . CHAPTER IX. How Mininc CLAIMS ARE HELD, -— ASSESSMENT WORK... . CHAPTER X. Locat Mintinc Ruies anp REGULATIONS PaGE 196 202 202 208 208 214 256 259 261 263 280 xii TABLE OF CONTENTS. CHAPTER XI. How Titte to Minrne Ciaims MAY BE TERMINATED. PAGE I. By Abandonment . . . . «1 1 ee ee ew we we 295 Il. By Forfeiture. 2. . 2. 6 1 6 ee we ee ww ww , (800 CHAPTER XII. RELOCATION. 6 6 ew ee ee ee ew ww ww ww «806 CHAPTER XIII Tue Possessory TITLE on TITLE BEFORE PATENT. I. The Right of Possession . . Bog a ee. ao OLE II. Action for the Possession of Mining Claims ee 331 III. Conveyance of Mining Claims before Patent. — Statute of Frands 338 CHAPTER XIV. THE PATENT. I. Obtaining the Patent & ete) aa! ope ee Ge) a ww) ee We ET As Bapendiure. 6% aw yw ee 6 we See we we ww BES B. Survey . . ecole) os abe SL at a ye ts, 3B C. The Application Pana a: anita “By Ue, Bp Gn army “Ae Yen eh ee OOe (a) Lhe Application . . - + « . 858 (b.) Proofs which must saeaseptaie the Application . 2 e « 861 (c.) Posting and Publication . . ce w « « 868 D. Entry. . . Gh Gat SseuRpree Ay ep 6h apr sch Ga, a OS E. Affidavits and Proof » ee ote « w @ 300 F. Action by the Land Office ain Toone af Powat Yom Se we OL G. Hearings as to the Character of Land. . . . . « «. . « 876 Ii. Adverse Claim and Action thereon. . . . . « » « « « . 882 lII. Effect of the Patent. . . . 1. . 2 we ee aoe & @ B16 IV. Vacation of Patent . . . 2. . 1. ee we ee o ee 481 CHAPTER XV. Dirrrrent Kinps or CLaims, THEIR SPECIAL FEATURES AND CHARACTERISTICS. I. Lode Claims . . ; toy Cae Be Bote: See ca ETE A. Definition af Badles Anes Rule Sends ae bye ME Gao cel ae, eee ABE B. Cross and Uniting Veins... 1 ww ww ww wwe AUD TABLE OF CONTENTS. xiii Pace II. PlacerClaims. . . . 1. 2. 1 6 ee ew ww ew ew ew ee 476 III. Lodesin Placers. . . . 2. 1 1 ee ww we ew ew ew ee 482 IV. Tunnel Claims . . ..... 2... ee ee eee 494 V. MillSites . . . wind. Shey Steg Be. Uencrgste ter lace ‘Geet he batol tee Cap et 708: VI. Water Right Claims Bp Se> Se Gey RR as kh tee “aes Sas ay eee a we Sas DIO CHAPTER XVI. ConFLICTING GOVERNMENT GRANTS. I. Town Site Grants . ..... . . . . 66... . Oil II. School Land Grants ......- 2. 6 2 ee ee we BBS III]. Land Grants to Railroads. . . . . . 2. ee ew we 6582 IV. Homestead and Pre-emption Grants . . . ..... . =. 540 V. Indian Reservations. . . . . 2. 2 ee ee ee es BSS CHAPTER XVII. SreciaL Statutory Provisions FOR THE SALE OF PusBLic LANDS CONTAINING PARTICULAR MINERALS. I. @oal Gandsia- «6 # wi we a ce ce Se ee me a ew 18S Ls CSalinie Gands: 4° 2: 4) a a. es we ee a ww ee OBE CHAPTER XVIII. TITLE ACQUIRED BY STATUTE OF LimITATIONS . .... . . 568 CHAPTER XIX. Rieuts or Mine Owners. I. Working and Surface Rights. . . . . . . 1. 2 e es 576 II. Rightsof Way .. . . . 584 A. Incident to the Grant or + Reservation, or r expressed therein . . . 584 B. Givenby Statule . . . 1. 1... eee 659 I. Timber Rights . . . . 2... 1 1. we ee ee 598 IV. Tailings and Refuse. . . oe a ei, ee OOF A. Property therein and their Deposit on - Land tye ee ee OOF. B. Pollution of Streams . . Bee Boe oe ae Soe we ONS Vi ‘Drainage; gs a @ # @ 4S Rw & ae ow @ we a 680 II. TABLE OF CONTENTS. CHAPTER XX. Water RiGuts. Water ‘Rights, on the ;Public Lands . A. Appropriation ‘ : B. Rights of Way for Bittghiee : C, Injuries by Manner of constructing or oper naling Direten D. Transfer of Title to Water Rights . a E. Abandonment of Water Righis Subterranean Streams and Percolations . CHAPTER XXI. ‘Ricuts oF SURFACE aND LatTerAL Support. Surface Support . Lateral Support . ‘ CHAPTER XXII. ‘Mining on THE LAND OF OTHERS. —- TRESPASS . ‘CHAPTER XXIII. 672 675 - 686 689 “EQUITABLE PRINCIPLES AND ‘REMEDIES.IN THEIR APPLICATION TO MINES. I. II. Ill. qv. II. II. IT. an. Braud js eH Hw} ew Injunction . al Gow Receivers Inspection ‘CHAPTER XXIV. Jornt ‘OwnersHip.oFr MInEs. Rights and Relations of Joint Owners .. Partition of Mines ‘i Mining Partnerships ‘CHAPTER XXV. “MINERS. Wages of Miners . A. Manner of Payment B. Lien and Preference é Health and Safety of Miners . Health and Safety: Statutes in their ‘Relation to the aay: of Negi pence > 705 716 737 739 766 766 771 780 TABLE OF CONTENTS. APPENDIX. Unirep States Statutes. Mineral Lands and Mining Resources Coal Lands . rae : Saline Lands Timber Rights j Protection of the Lives of Minanss in thie cTeeritories: Lanp OrricE REGULATIONS. Mineral Lands open to Exploration, Occupation, and Purchase Status of Lode Claims located prior to May 10, 1872 . Patents for Veins or Lodes heretofore issued. Manner of locating Claims on Veins or Lodes after May 10, 1872. Tunnel Rights Manner of Proceeding to obtain Government Title to Vein or Tips Claims Placer Claims . Mill Sites Possessory Right. . . Proof of Citizenship of Mining Claimants . Adverse Claims Appointment of Deputy ‘Surveyora of Mining Claims. — ~ Charges for Sur. veys and Publications. — Fees of Registers and Receivers, etc. . ‘ Proceedings before the Register and Receiver and Surveyors-General in Contests and Hearings to establish the Character of Lands . ADDENDA. & «+ % 4 wow € & & Se RH wR zw PEND WR te ih ae? eh wr ie XV Pace 795 807 809 810 811 815 815 816 817 819 821 825 828 829 831 831 833 8385 838 839 TABLE OF CASES. ABBOTT v. Primeaux Abel v. Love’ Abercrombie, Nicholas Acheson v. Stevenson Ackerman v. Hartley Ackert, Charles H. Adam »v. Briggs Iron Co. Adams v. Ore Knob Copper Co. —, Stuart v. Adams Lode ‘Aderhold v. Oil Well Supply Co. Ah Tong, Tibbitts v. Ah Yew v. Choate Ahern v. Dubuque Mining Co. Alabama, State of Alabama, Justice v. Alabama Quartz Mine Albion Con. M. Co., St. Lawrence M. 33, 52, 4, 21, 89, 37, 581, 562, Pace 338 755 544 735 729 559 749 150 758 201 140 206 529 633 567 563 367 Pace Amador Canal & M. Co., Ginocchio v. 343 Amador Medean G. M. Co. v. South Spring Hill G. M. Co. 455, 542 Amador Queen M. Co. v. DeWitt 592 Amador & Sacramento Canal Co., Anderson v. 878 ——, Hobbs v. 622 American Co. v. Bradford 668 American Flag, Colorado Central v. 278 American Flag Lode 366, 409 American Hill Quartz Mine 315, 430 American Mining Co., Overman S. M. Co. ». 258 Ames v. Ames 21 Amie Mining Co., Little Pittsburgh Con. M. Co. v. 217, 296, 340 Amy & Silversmith Mining Co. King v. 458, “60, 467, 468 Co. v. 355, 409 aoe C. M. Co., Butte % Boston Alden’s Appeal 86] M. Co.»v. 746, 7638 Alder Gulch Con. M. Co. v. Hayes 656 | Anderson v. Amador & Sacramento Alexander, Gorman Mining Co. v. 207| Canal Co. 378 ——, Kings County v. 557 | —— v. Black 231 —, Moody v. 134 | ——, Hamilton v. 560 Alford v. Barnum 536 | ——, Harvey’s Heirs v. 736 Alger Lode 402 | —— v. Simpson 70 Andreas, Neumoyer v. 73 Algonquin Coal Co. v. Northern C. & I. Co. Alice Edith Lode Alice Placer Mine Allegheny Gas Co., Eaton v. 65 351 409 172 Andrews, Cook v. Andromeda Lode Ankeny, McGoon v. 95 352, 471, 509 610 Antediluvian Lode & Mill Site 222, 363, 524 Allegheny Oil Co. v. Bradford Oil Co. 152, 153, 781 Allen v. Dunlap 249, 731 —, Gerard B. 558 ——, Henderson v. 755 ——, Hollinshead v. 8, 12, 17 —, Rader v. 572 ——, Sheets v. 52 Allen Gold M. Co., Southern Pac. R. Co. v. Allentown Mining Co., Thomas Iron Co. v. Allison’s Appeal Allouez Mining Co., Edwards v. Alps C. M. Co., McGowan ». Alta Mill Site 352, 356, 361, Alta Mining Co., Benson Mining Co. v. 271, 425, Alvord, Davis v. 634, 700, 125, 538 748 733 623 316 508 693 775 Antelope Lode 435 Anthony v. Jillson 206, 231, 242, 394 Anthracite Mesa Coal Co. 560 Antoine Co. v. Ridge Co. Apple Blossom Placer v. Cora Lee Lode 861, 418, 493 Arbuckle v. Biederman 710 356 Argentine M. Co. v. Tenible M. Co. 455 —,, Van Zandt v. 217, 321, 449 Arizona Copper Co., Jantzen v. 205, 230, 237, 241 Arizona Gold M. Co., Carney v. 278 Armstrong v. Caldwell 42, 572 ——,, Coppinger v. 118, 610 —, Findley »v. 590 —, Higgins v. 751, 760 —— v. Lake Champlain Granite Co. 133 v. Lower 199, 218, 310, 327, 464 Xvill 158 410 Armstrong, Munroe v. Arnold, Dotson v. —, Lyman ». 183 v. Richmond Iron Works 698 — v. Stevens 671 —, William A. 365 Arnott, Hall v. 199, 310 Arthur v. Earle 544 Ashland Iron Co., Green v. 6 Ashman v. Wigton 126 Askew, McDonald »v. 651, 668 -Aspen C. M. Co. v. Williams 880, 382 Aspen M. & S. Co., Billings v. 205, 271 — v. Rucker 748 —— Wood v. 204 Atchison v. Peterson 615, 642, 721 Atherton, Baker v. 142 —— v. Fowler 321, 423, 534 Atkins v. Hendree 258, 312 Atkinson, Ganter v. 53 —, Gribben ». 93 Atlantic Co. v. Maryland Co. 697 Atlantic & Pacific R. Co. 538 Attwood »v, Fricot 288, 322, 325, 341 Audenried v. Woodward 129 Aurora Hill Con. M. Co. v. 85 Mining Co. 271, 338, 424 Aurora Hill M. Co., Tangerman v. 370 Aurora Lode v. Bulger Hill & N. G. Placer 494 Austin v. Huntsville Coal & M. Co. 40, 120, 698 Avery, Pratt v. 366 — v. Smith 563 Axley, Patton v. 52 Bascock, Clark v. 98, 114 — v. Stewart 764 Baca Float 547 Bacigalupi, Carter v. 288, 242, 244, ae 48 Back v. Sierra Nevada Con. M. Co. 397, 499, 501 Bacon, Hardenhergh v. 343 Baden Gas Co., Cleminger v. 166 Bailey, McGowen v. 685, 744 Bailey & Grand View M. & S. Co. 366, 507 Baker v. Atherton 142 ——, Gruber »v. 712 —— v. Hart 52, 61, 700 v. Jamison 194 —— v. McDowell 85 Baldwin, McCormick v. Balfour v. Russell Ballou, Strettell v. Balthaser, Reading & Pottsville R. Co. v. Bamford v. Lehigh Zinc & Iron Co. ——, Lehigh Zinc & Iron Co. v. Bank v. Dow Bankhead v. Brown 273 144 748 191 90 90, 119, 70 7 41, 74 593 TABLE OF CASES, Banks, Nathaniel 562 Bannon v. Mitchell 633 Barber Asphalt Paving Co.,Negav. 71 Barden v. Northern Pacific R. Co. 588, 534, 539 Barker, Weese v. 258, 311, 695 Barkley v. Tielke 669, 671 Barksdale v. Hairston 66, 73 —— v. Parker’s Adm’rs 50 Barlow, White v. 660 Barnard, Faxon v. 197, 244, 254, 320 —— v. McKenzie 773 Barnes, Berwind v. 682 —, Charles A. 481 , Lulay v. 127, 574 ——, Newman v. 414 Barnhart v. Lockwood 77, 174 Barnum, Alford v. 536 — v. Landon 746 Barrett, Stoakes v. 196 Barry v. Worcester 70 Bartlett, Koen v. 15 Bartlett C. & I. Co. v. Roach 787 Bartley v. Phillips 166, 176 Barton Coal Co. v. Cox 696 Basey v. Gallagher 6438 Bashford, Eaman v, 771 Bass, Hoch v. 158, 161, 734 Bassick, McGrath v. 275 Bates, Bowman v. 710, 714 Batten, Walton v. 3879 Baudit, Remington v. 276 Baugh, Wheatley v. 672 Bay State G. M. Co. v. Trevillion 411, 508 Bay State S. M. Co. v. Brown 889 Bayard, Grubb v. 55, 59, 61, 67 Bayaud, Cahoon v. 72 Bayliss, Dillon v. 248 Beale, Jennings v. 65, 785 Bean, James 561 — », Valle 712 Bear Creek G. M. Co., Cronin v. 397 Bear River & Auburn W. & M. Co.». Boles 650 ——, Campbell v. 667 —, McDonald »v. 648 —— v. New York M. Co. 620, 646 —, Wixon v. 620, 650 Beard v. Federy 419 — v. Skeldon 787 Beatie v. Rocky Branch C. Co. » 94 Beatty’s Appeal 778 Beatty v. Gregory 68, 69, 172 Beaucoup Co. v. Cooper 781 Bechtel C. M. Co., Bodie T. & M. Co. v. 406, 503 Beck, Reed »v. 107, 120 Becker, Nichols v. 279, 411 —— v. Pugh 232, 258, 290, 394 — v. Sears 406, 492 Bed Rock T. & M. Co., Bell». 297, 808 Bedford’s Appeal 14 Beech Creek Coal Co., Wilson v. 99 TABLE OF CASES. xix Beecher, Brown v. 58, 77 | Blake, Columbian Oil Co. v. 31 v. Dacey 768 | —— v. Thorne 885 —, Hoffman v. 399 | Blakley v. Marshall 14 Belcher Con. G. M. Co. v. Deferrari 272, | Blasdel, Phillpotts v. 288, 346 337 | Blewett v. Coleman 24 Belk v. Meagher 197, 268, 276, 304, 308, | ——, Coleman v. 25 314, 321, 329 | Blindert v. Kreiser 74 Bell v. Bed Rock T.& M.Co. 297, 303 | Bliss v. Kingdom 663 —,, Bluestone Coal Co. v. 177 | ——, Winters v. 379, 545 —, Hicks v. 178, 196 | Bliven Petroleum Co., Union Petro- ——, McDaniel r. 558} leum Co, v. 1, 82 —- 2. Skillicorn 468 | Block v. Murray 776 Bellwether Lode 364, 403 | Blodgett v. Potosi Co. 343, Belshaw, San Felipe M. Co. ». 343 | Blue Bird M. Co. v. Largey Belvoir M. & M.Co., Ferguson v. 279, 316 Benjamin, United States v. 603, 606 Benson Mining Co. v. Alta Mining Co. 271, 425, 693 Berg v. Koegel 251 Bergin, Junkans v. 654 Berringer v. Cobb 768 Berry v. Central Pacific R. Co. 589 —, McBurney v. 250 v. Woodburn 759 682 770 Berwind v. Barnes Berwind-White C. M. Co., Sally v. 456 —— v. Murray 466, 699, 742 Blue Point Placer, Nevada Reservoir Ditch v. . 405 Bluestone Coal Co. v. Bell 177 Boaro, Erhardt v. 215, 223, 236, 286, 309, 72 2 Boatman, Eilers v. 199, 233, 330, 401 Bodie Con. M. Co., Jupiter M. Co. v. 217, 229, 240, 244, 257, 269, 285, 302, 450 Bodie T. & M. Co. v. Bechtel 406, 503 Bogart v. Daniels 208 Boggs v. Merced Mining Co. 196, 198, oe Best, Gale v. 536 | Bohanon v. Howe 206 Bestwick v. Ormsby Coal Co. 173, 586, | Bolen, Snoddy v. 84, 185 : 684 Boles, Bear River & Auburn W. & Bewick v. Fletcher 128) M. Co. v. 650 v. Muir 772| Bonanza, Iowa v. 405 Bicknell, Maeris v. 645 | Bonanza G. M. Co., Empire G. M. —., Marius v. 646] Co.v. 694 Biederman, Arbuckle v. 710 | Bond, Brown v. 411 Bier, Brownfield v. 492 | Bonesell v. McNider 412 Big Flat Gravel M. Co. v. Big Flat Bonnell, Commonwealth v. 782 Gold M. Co. 860 | Bonner, John R. L. 564 —, Malone »v. 772 | Booher v. Browning 735 Big Pittsburg Con. S. M.Co., Tabor v. 693 | Book v. Justice Mining Co. 210, 218, 229, Bigelow, Nessler v. 570 271, 309 Billings v. Aspen M. &S. Co. 205, 271| Boone v. Stover 58 —-v. Taylor 9| Bordeaux, Davidson v. 220, 278 Bi-metallic Mining Co. 357, 472 | Borroughs, Powell v. 109 Bird, Douty v. 635 | Boston Franklinite Co. v. Condit 21, 749 » Shepherd v. 201 | Boucher, Duryea v. 245 Bisbee, McKeon v. 324 | —— v. Mulverhill 292, 763 Bissell, First Nat. Bank v. 754 | Boulder & Buffalo M. Co. 5381 v. Foss 754 | Bouscher, Rara Avis G.&5.M.Co.v. 773 Black, Anderson v. 231 | Bower, Schultz v. 687 v. Elkhorn Mining Co. 9, 295, 296, | Bowman v. Bates 710, 714 32 3, 426 v. Irons 710 ——, Largey ». 493 v. Patrick 707 ——, Noyes »v. 329 | ——, Patrick v. 707 Black Diamond Lode 357 | Bowyer v. Seymour 168 Black Hawk Townsite, Pederson Boyd v. Negley 596 Lode v. 375, 525 | ——, Quimby v. 246, 274 Black Queen v. Excelsior No. 1 414 | Boydston v. Meachem 137 Black River Phosphate Co., State v. 181) Boyer, Dickenson v. 772 Blaen Coal Co. v. McCulloh 697 | —— v. Fulmer 89, 90, 99 Blain, Wills v. 314, 838 | Boyle, Dickinson v. 698 Blair, Bradford Oil Co. v. 110, 188, 189 | Boynton, Savage v. 379 Blair Iron Co. v. Lloyd 701 | Braceville Coal Co. v. People 768 Blake v. Butte S.M.Co. 330, 401, 429, | Bracken v. Preston 787 469 | Bradford, American Co. v. 668 xx TABLE OF CASES. Bradford, Marquart v. 297 | Buena Vista Lode 856 Bradford Oil Co., Allegheny Oil Buena Vista Petroleum Co. v. Tulare Co. v. 152, 158, 731] O.& M. Co. 528 v. Blair 110, 138, 139 | Buffalo Co., Petit v. 410 Bradley v. Harkness 752, 755 | Bugbey, Water & Mining Co. v. 527 — v. Lee 272, 826 | Buhl v. Thompson 173 Bradstreet v. Rehm 363 | Buley, Montana v. 581 Brady v. Husby 249| Bulger Hill & N. G. Placer, Aurora Branagan v. Dulaney 221, 408,475] Lode v. 494. Brandow v. Pocotillo 8. M. Co. 845 | Bullard v. Flanagan 559 Brandt v. McKeever 64, 182 | Bullion, Beck, & Champion M. Co. v. Braswell, Judge v. 762| Eureka Hill M. Co. 470 Brazier, Upton v. 70| Bullion Mining Co., Courchaine v. 523 Breece Mining Co. 471 | ——, 420 Mining Co. v. 888, 400, 572 Brehen, O’Donnell v. 40 | Bullock v. Central Pacific R. Co. 436, 588 Brennan v. Hume 658 | Bulwinkle, Napier v. 677 Bretell v. Swift 364, 367, 368 | Bumgardner, Lee v. 50, 66 Brewer v. French 720 | Bumpus, Stone v. 652 Brewster Iron M. Co,, Marvin v. 41, 85, | Bundy v. Catto 184 ' 672, 581, 679 | Bunker Hill & S.M. & C. Co., Burke v. 392 Bridge Co., Stokely v. 187 | Burbank, Rivers v. 665 Briggs v. Davis 45 | Burdge v. Smith 529 —, Hays v. 698 | —— v. Underwood 196, 662, 663 Briggs Tron Co., Adam v. 4, 21, 39, 749 | Burgan v. Lyell 762 Bright, Carey v. 129 | Burgner v. Humphrey 120, 680 —— v. Elkhorn Mining Co. 870, 376, ae Burgwin, Republic Iron Works v. 587 Broad v. Ray 560| Burke v. Bunker Hill & 8S. M. & C. Broad Axe Lode 866} Co. 392 Broder v. Natonia Water Co. 661 | —— v. McDonald 219, 225, 897, 465 Broman v, Young 74 | Burleson, Fernandez v. 773 Bronson v. Lane 76, 583 | Burnham, Snyder »v. 762 Brooks, McKee v. 16 | Burnum, James W. 563 Brown, Bankhead v. 693 | Burt, Duryea v. 756 ——,, Bay State S. M. Co. »v. 889 | ——, State v. 6 —— v. Beecher 68, 77 | Burton, Harkness v. 15, 70 — v. Bond 411 | Bush, F. L. 361 —, Carnahan v. 63 | —— v. Sullivan 69 — v. Corey 45, 190, 597 | Bushnell v. Crooke M. & S. Co. 395 —, Daniel v. 706 | —— v. Proprietors of Ore Bed 622 —— v. 49 & 56 Quartz M. Co. 462 | Butcher, Hauswirth v. 258 -——, Hope Mining Co. v. 397, 498, 499, | Butler, Davis v. 296 502 | ——, State National Bank v. 761 —,, Mitchell v. 556 | ——, Suffern v. 40 ——., Moore v. 194 | Butler Savings Bank, Osborne »v. 765 — v. Morris 6| Butte, Murray v. 399, 522 — »v. Peterson 596 | Butte, Anaconda & Pac. Ry. Co. v. ——, Pfeiffer v. 628| Montana Union Ry. Co. 592 , Salt Co. v. 598 | Butte & Boston Mining Co. 436, 494 v. Solary 727 | ——, Anaconda C. M. Co. » 746, 763 — v. Spilman 31, 79 Butte C. & D. Co.». Vaughn 647, 670 —, Timlin v. 89, 90, 98, 99, 114 | Butte City Smoke House Lode Cases 522, —— v. Torrence 577, 583, 625, 681 628 — v. Vandergrift 83, 103, 157 | Butte Hardware Co. v. Cobban 399 —, Whitaker ». 85 | Butte & Montana Com. Co., Heaney v. 604, Brownfield v. Bier 492 729 Browning, Booher v. 735 | Butte Silver M. Co., Blake v. 380, 401, Bruckhart, Haldeman v. 673 429, 469 Brundy v. ‘Mayfield 277, 304, 400, my 746 | Butte T. M. Co. v. Morgan 649 Bryan v. McCaig 274, 395 | Butterfield, Miller v. 758 Bryden, McClintock v. 196 | Bybee v. Oregon & California R. Co. 662 Bubb, Collins v. 546 | Byington, McGarrity v. 272, 287, 297, 302 Buchanan v, Cole 775 | Byrne v. Slauson 234, 368, 414 Buckley, Smith v. 659 | Byrnes, Douglass v. 594 Buell, Johnson v. 464 '——, McLaren »v. 774 TABLE OF CASES. xxi Case Con. G. & S. M. Co., Golden Carson, Girard v. 428 Fleece G. & S. M. Co. v. 199, 207, 293, | ——, Steves v. 892 314, 400 | Carson City G. & S. M. Co. v. North Cadle, Cornelius, Jr. 562} Star M. Co. 359, 462 Cahoon v. Bayaud 72| Carter v. Bacigalupi 288, 242, 245, 248, Cain, Coryell v. 335 344 Caldwell, Armstrong v. 42, 572 | —— v. Hoke 738 v. Copeland 42, 45, 572, 573 | ——, McShane v. 344 —— v. Fulton 42, 44, 56, 63, 65, 78, | —— v. Thompson 519 7, 588 | Caruthers v. Pemberton 655 Caledonia G. M. Co. v. Noonan 546 | Cascade Lode 364, 403 ——, Noonan v. 645, 546 | Casey v. Northern Pacific R. Co. 539 Caledonia Mining Co. v. Rowen 377 | Cash G. & S. M. Co., Cullacott v. 427 California v. Dardanelles 403 | Caste, Nancy Ann 562 ——, Keystone Con. M. Co. v. 581 | Castle, Taylor.v. 757 California Oil Co., Gird v. 198, 280, 236, v. Womble 222, 381 245, 260, 266, 272 | Castleberry v. State 660 California, State of , 532 | Castner, John K. 357 Callihan v. Murtland 747 | Castor v. McShaffery 778 Callison, Mount Diablo M. & M. Co. v. 286, | Catlett v. Young 789 267, 284, 301, 448 | Catron v. Lewishon 414, 788 ee Iron Co., Johnstown Iron Catto, Bundy v. 184 Co. 56, 62, 64, 66, 73 | Cayuga Lode 368 Cambria M. Co., Hartford r M. Co. v. 89, | Central Pacific R. Co. 537, 538 698 —, Berry v. 5389 Cameron, Daniel 362 | ——, Bullock v. 436, 588 Cameron Lode 525 | _—, Consolidated Channel Co. v. 610 ——, Erie Lode v. 367 | ——, Doran v. 535 Camman, Hartwell v. 40|—— v. Mammoth Blue Gravel Co. 587 Campbell v. Bear River & Auburn —, North Star M. Co. v. 588 W. &M. Co. 667 | —— v. Valentine 538 —, Ellet v. 495, 500 | ——, Zadig v. 881 —, Galloway v. 738 | Central Smelting Co., Kahn v. 754 ——, Iron Silver Mining Co. v. 392, 464, |, Old Telegraph M. Co. v. 736 489 Central Trust Co. v. Sheffield & B.C. —, John 547, 557} I. &R. Co. 771 ——, O'Reilly v. 204, 205 | Chadwick, Coleman v. 673, 681 v. Rankin 240, 284, 320, 321 | Chalfant v. Williams 102 — v. West 668 | Chamberlain v. Dow 77 ‘Canfield v. Ford 41, 750 | —— v. Parker 110 ‘Cannon, Northern Pacific R. Co.v. 347,|Chambers v. Harrington 263, 269, 389, 425, 434, 534 401 ‘Capen, Dickinson v. 880, 544 | ——, Harrington v. 221, 389, 401 Caples v. Steel 714 | —— v. Jones 523 Capner v. Mining Co. 18 | Champion Con. M. Co., Northern Pac. ‘Capricorn Placer 208, 368, 375] R. Co. v. 539 ‘Capron v. Strout 778 | Champion Mining Co. 259, 360 Carbon Iron Mfg. Co., Lord v. 634, 729, | —— v. Consolidated Wyoming G. M. 730| Co. 827, 394, ae 726 Carey v. Bright 129 | —_, Consolidated Wyoming G.M Carl, Granger Coal Co. v. 92 Co. v 426, 459 Carlin v. Chappel 682 | ——, Walrath v. 461 Carnahan v. Brown 63 Chandler, Ramsey v. 643 Carnegie, Lentz v. 628 | Chapman, Helm »v. 772 Carney v. Arizona Gold M. Co. 273 v. Toy Long 820, 721 Carothers, Mayer v. 571 | Chappel, Carlin v 682 Carp River Iron Co., Ward v. 17, 18 | Charles v. Eshleman 759, 760 Carpenter, Ophir S. "M. Co. v. 656, 657 | Chartiers Oil Co., Glasgow v. 165 —, United States v. 545 | Chartiers Valley Gas es Colle v. 678 Carr, In re 741 | Chase v. Savage S. M 212 v. Whitebreast Fuel Co. 93, 120 | Chavanne Quartz Mine 294, 378 Carrhart v. Montana Mineral i. & M. 328 | Cheeneyv. Nebraska & C. Stone Co. 693 Carroll, Delaware & Hudson Canal Cheesman v. Hart 1, 455 Co. v. 791 '——, Iron Silver M. Co. v. 450 xxl TABLE OF CASES. Cheesman v. Shreeve 217, 309 | Clever, Guffey v. 140 — v. Shreve 455, 693 | Clift v. Clift 14 Cheever, Coates v. 11 | Clifton v. Montague 100 Chessman, William A. 360, 481 | Cline, Mitchell v. 211, 260, 426 Chesson, Phelps v. 160 | Clipper Mining Co. 414 Chester Co. v. Lucas 39, 125 | Cloke, County of Yuba »v. 622 Chester Slate Co., Miller v. 107 | Clowser v. Joplin Mining Co. 19 Chestnut, Dougherty ». 704 | Clyde Coal Co., Jenkins v. 148 Chevington & Bunn Co. v. Lewis 115 | Coal Co. v. Estievenard 791 Chew, Esmond »v. 609, 648 | ——, Flynn v. 108 Chicago & Allegheny O. & M. Co. v. ——, Franklin Co. v. 15, 51 United States Petroleum Co. 75, 76, |——, Knight v. 388 156, 788 | ——, Robinson v. 621 Chicago Quartz M. Co. v. Oliver 536 | —— v. Yung 787 Chicago, Santa Fe & Cal. R. Co. v. Coal, Coke & Mfg. Co., Petroleum McGrew 189] Co. ». 108, 148, 167 Chicago & Van Meter C. M. Co., Van Coal & Mining Co. v. Clay 790 Meter v. 172 | Coal Creek M. Co. v. Davis 785 Chicago, Wilmington, & V. C. Co. v. Coal Creek M. & M. Co. v. Moses 703 Peterson 788 | ——, Pearne v. 185, 589 Chicago Zinc Co., Wickersham v. 148, | Coal Run Coal Co. v. Jones 782 151 | Coast, Phillips v. 702 Childs v. Hurd 122, 142 | Coates v. Cheever 11 — v.K.C., St. J. & C.B. RB. Co. 21 | Cobb, Berringer v. 768 —,, Walter C. 356 | ——, Murphy v. 810, 337 Chilton, Harvey v. 647 | Cobban, Butte Hardware Co. v. 399 Chisholm, Thomas v. 208, 206, 396 | Cochran v. Pew 98, 166 Choate, Ah Yew v. 529 | Coe Quartz M. Co., Silvester v. 773 Christian, Tunstall v. 677 | Coker v. Simpson 645, 725 Christie. Thompson v. 161 | Cole, Buchanan v. 7715 Christner v. Cumberland & Elk L. C. —, Springfield F.& M. Co. v. 72, 775 Co. 792 | Cole S. M. Co. v. Virginia & Gold Hill Christy’s Appeal 28| W. Co. 641, 719, 720 Chumasero, Russell v. 247 | Coleman’s Appeal 20, 25, 29, 64 Chung Kee v. Davidson 759 | Coleman v. Blewett 25 Church Placer, War Dance v. 492 | ——, Blewett v. 24 Chynowitch v. Granby M. & S. Co. 71 | —— v. Chadwick 673, 681 Citizens’ N. G. Co. v. Shenango N. G. — v. Coleman 23 Co. 734 | —— v. Curtis 277 ——, Springer »v. 98, 163 | —— v. Grubb 24 City Rock v. King of the West 404 | Collins v. Bubb 546 Clark v. Babcock 93, 114 | —— v. Chartiers Valley Gas Co. 673 — Davis v. 571 | ——, Fabian »v. , 669 —— v. Duval 196 | —— v. Mechling 122 — v. Ervin 201, 482, 545 | ——, Northern Pacific R. Co. v. 589, 559 ——, Fitzgerald v. 468 | Colman v. Clements 288, 302 ——, Henshaw v. 196, 198, 725 | Colorado, Freese v. 582 ——— v. Jones 160 | ——, Silver Cliff v. 531 ——,, Jones v, 757 | ——, State of 681, 582, 566 ——, McKinstry v. 318, 328 | Colorado Central v. American Flag 278 —— v. Midland Blast Furnace Co. — 94 Colorado Central Con. M. Co. v. Turck ——, Montana Co. v. 441, 448, 455, 693, 456, 461, 694 723 | Colorado C. & I. Co. v. Lamb 786 —- v. Ritter 758 | —— v. United States 542, 554 — v. Taylor 352] Colorado L. & M. Co., Crassus M. — v. Willett 663] Co. v. 204, 229 Clary v. Hazlett 490 | Colorado Midland R. Co. v. Croman 464 Clay, Coal & Mining Co. v. 790 | ——, Twin Lakes H. G. M. S. »v. 189 ——, Kansas City M. & M. Co. ». 542 | Colton, Joseph L. 656 Cleary, Leavers v. 579 | Columbia Mining Co. v. Holter 655 Clegg v. Jones 737 | Columbian Oil Co. v. Blake 31 Clement v. Youngman 62, 66, 73 | Columbus, & Hocking C. & I. Co. v. Clements, Colman v. 288, 302} Tucker 624 Cleminger v. Baden Gas Co. 166 ' Colvin v. McCune 671 TABLE OF CASES. Comegys v. Russell 140 | Copeland, Caldwell v. 42, 45, 572, 573. Commonwealth v. Bonnell 782 | Copper Bell M. Co., Shreve v. 220, 282, —— v. Connell 782 845 —— v. Coonrad 783 | Copper Hill Co. v. Spencer 342. ——, Haddock v. 783 | Copper Prince, Warren Mill Site ». 406, —— v. Hartzell 770 507 —— v. Hutchison 784 | Coppinger v. Armstrong 118, 610 v. Isenberg 769| Cora Lee Lode, Apple Blossom —— v. Jones 785| Placer v. 361, 413, 493. — v. Reynolds 783 | Corcoran, Overman S.M.Co.v. 221, 594 —— v. Richmond 783 | Cordell Placer Mine 562 —— v. Russell 613, 629 | Corey, Brown v. 45, 190, 597 —_ »v. Steimling 7, 612, 702 | Cormack, Gourdier v. 687 —— v. Tompkins 782 | Corning Tunnel v. Slide Lode 370 — »v. Wigton 784 | Corning Tunnel Co. v. Pell 498, 500, 501, —— v. Wilkesbarre Coal Co. 782 : 503 — ». Vipond 784 | Correa v. Frietas 663. Conant v. Smith 29 | Correction Lode 857 Condit, Boston Franklinite Co. v. 21, 749 | Coryell v. Cain 835: Condon v. Mammoth Mining Co. 364, 367 | Courchaine v. Bullion M. Co. 523 Cone Iron Works, Stockbridge Iron Courtright v. Wisconsin Central M. Co. »v. 698, 741} Co. 589° Conewago Iron Co., Ridgely v. 89, 91 | Covode, Irwin v. 12 Coney v. Mammoth 405 | Cowan v. Hardeman 583 Conger v. Weaver 196, 647, 662 | ——, Johnston v. 63 Conlin v. Kelly 201, 480, 482 v. Radford Iron Co. 50, 176 Connell, Commonwealth v. 782 | Coward, Felger v. 343. Connell Lode 369 | Cowell v. Lammers 422, 584 Conner v. McPhee 247 | Cox, Barton Coal Co. v. 696 — v. Terry 558, 559 | Crabell v. Wapello Coal Co. 789 Conrad v. Morehead 102, 153, 154 | Craig v. Thompson 219, 246, 253, 311 Consolidated Channel Co. v. Central ——, Wedekind »v. 529 Pacific R. Co. 610 | Crandall v. Woods 645 Consolidated Coal Co. v. Schaefer 113, | Crary, Union Water Co. v. 650, 668 142 | Craven, Swaim v. 412 Consolidated Coal Co. of St. Louis v. Craw v. Wilson 764 Peers 38, 119, 187 | Crawford, Kennedy v. 162 ——, Peers v. 137 | —, Sierra Grande M. Co. v. 508 v. Scheller 788 Creary, Dougherty v. 609, 670, 756 v. Schmisseur 580 | Creighton, Ladley v. 141 Consolidated Mining Co. 357, 471 | Creswell M. Co. v. Johnson 378 Consolidated Republican M. Co., Leba- Crismon, Union Pacific R. Co. v. 587 non M. Co. of N. Y.v. 810, 837, 344, | Creesus M. Co. v. Colorado L. & M. 695| Co. 204, 229 Consolidated Republican * Mountain Croman, Colorado Midland R. Co, v. 464 M. Co. v. Lebanon M. Co. 212, 274 | Cronin v. Bear Creek G. M. Co. 397 Consolidated Wyoming G. M. Co. «. Crooke M. & S. Co., Bushnell v. 395 Champion M. Co. 426, 459 | Cross v. Tome 120 —, Champion M. Co. v. 327, 394, 474, | Crossman v. Pendery 217, 321 726 Crouch, H. W. R. 543 Consolidation Coal Co., Hicks v. 774 v. Puryear 15 Constans, Shafer v. 898 | Crow, Waring v. 287, 296, 335, 745 Continental Co. v. Gage 411 | Cryan v. Ridelsperger 158 Cook v. Andrews 95 Cersidl River M. Co., Dicey v. 271, 302 —, Reynolds v. 66 | Cullacott v. Cash G. & S. M. Co. 427 Cooke Townsite, Esler v. 507, 524 | Cullins v. Flagstaff S. M. Co. 779 Cooley, Smith v. 56, 749, 758 | ——, Flagstaff S. M. Co. v. 779 Cooney, Rogers v. 233, 921, 330, 611 | Culver, United States v. 542 Coonrad, Commonwealth v. 783 | Cumberland Cotton Factory, Miller v. 774 Cooper, Beaucoup Co. v. 781} Cumberland & Elk L. C. Co., Christ- v. Lovering 711| ner v. 792 —— v. Roberts 527 | Cummings, Park Co. v. 145, 586 Coosaw Mining Co. v. South Carolina — v. Peters 663 180, 723! Cummins, Watts v. 715 Xxiv Cunningham, O’Keiffe v. 609 ——, Weakland v. 46 Curtis, Coleman v. 277 Cusick, Leitham v. 718, 735 Cutting v. Reininghaus 378 Cyprus Mill Site 507 Dacey v. Beecher 768 Dahl v. Montana Copper Co. 489, 491 ——, Montana Copper Co. v. 489, 491 — v. Raunheim 898, 424, 488, 491 ——,, Raunheim v. 398, 488, 491 Dale v. Roosevelt 713 713 Dana, McClintock v. 13 Daney Gold M. Co., Heydenfeldt v. 418, 527, 530 Daniel v. Brown 786 Daniels, Bogart v. 208 —— ». Hilgard 781 Dardanelles, California v. 403 —, Overman v. 402 Darger v. Le Sieur 249 Dargin v. Koch 382 Dark v. Johnston 82, 80 Darragh v. Holdman 544 Davey, Duggan v. 465, 741 , Sheldon v. 144 Davidson v. Bordeaux 220, 278 ——., Chung Kee v. 759 , Irwin v. 731 v, Jordan 709 Davis v. Alvord 775 , Briggs v. 45 — v. Butler 296 — v. Clark 571 ——, Coal Creek M. Co. v. 785 — »v. Gale 651, 668, 670 — v. Henry 716 —— v. Jefferson Gas Co. 192, 685 —— v. Moss 107, 129, 165, 160, bas ——, Seaton Mining Co. v. v. Weibbold 198, 517, 200 Davitte, Georgia Slate Co. v. 727 Dayton’ G. & S. M. Co. v. Seawell 593, 594 Deadwood, Townsite of 200 TABLE OF CASES. Delaware, Lackawanna & Western R. Co. v. Sanderson 46,116 —, Woodward »v. 116 Del Monte M. & M. Co. v. New York & Last Chance M. Co.. 460 Del Re, McLaughlin v. 610 Deno ». Griffin 278, 401, 428 De Noon v. Morrison 273 Denver, McConnell v. 756 Dephanger, Philip 355 Depuy v. Williams 803 Derry v. Ross 299, 726 Desloges v. Pearce 58, 70 Des Moines v. Hall 184 Devereux v. Hunter 378 Devine, Kane v. 378 Devlin, Hughes v. 825, 749 De Witt, Amador Queen M.Co.v. 592 — , Warnock v. 234, 315 —, Westmoreland Nat. GasCo.v. 30, 31, 82, 79, 82, 110, 738 Dexter, Tabor v. 445 Dickenson v. Boyer 772 Dickert & Myers Sulphur Co., Utah M. & M. Co. v. 278, 800 Dickinson v. Boyle 698 — v. Capen 380, 544 Dietz v. Mission Transfer Co. 124, 128, 679 Dillon v. Bayliss 248 Dines, Jackson v. 206, 247 Dininny, Watt v. 139 District Court, People v. 397 —, People ex rel. Aspen Co. v. 593 Dixon, Merrill v. 536 5|——, Ortman v. 647, 667 Dobbs Placer Mine 200, 481 Dobler v. Northern Pacific R. Co. 381 Dobschuetz v. Holliday 128 Dock, Lykens Valley Coal Co. v. 7, 188 Dodge v. Marden 666, 671 ——,, Perego v. 385, 393 9 | Doe v. Sanger 463 —, Smith v. 196, 198, 335 — v. Tyler 231, 258 — vv. Waterloo Mining Co. 224, 287, 296, 362, 385, 398, 425, 457, 693 Dearden, Walter 558 | ——, Waterloo Mining Co. v. 218, 222 De Ardo, Morse v. 773 | Doherty v. Morris 275, 312, 395 De Bour, Mont Blanc Con. Gravel M. Dolles v. Hamberg C. M. Co. 279 Co. v. 893 | Dolly v. Lakin 257, 359 Decker v. Howell 757 | Donahoe, Kelly v. 186 Deep River G. M. Co. v. Fox 731 | Donahue v. Johnson 330 Deer Lake Co. v. Michigan L. & I. Co. 181 | —— v. Meister 238, 290 Deferrari, Belcher Con. G. M. Co. v. 272, | Donnel v. Humphreys 669 2 337 | Donnellan, Gwillim v. 391 Deffeback v. Hawke 197, 372, 423, 514, | Doran v. Central Pacific R. Co. 585 515, 517, 518, 524, 541 | Doster v. Friedensville Zinc Co. 184, 612 De Garcia v. Eaton 414 | Dotson v. Arnold 410 Delaney, Florence D. 202, 482 | Double v. Union H. & L. Co, 144 Delaware & Hudson Canal Co. v. Car- Dougherty v. Chestnut 704 roll 791 |——v. or 609, 670, bs —,Genet v. 42, 101, 578, 582, 611, ab v. Hagg —, Miles v. 117! Douglas, Mickle v. 151, ae TABLE OF CASES. Douglass v. Byrnes 594 ——, Draper v. 341 Douty ». Bird 635 Dow, Bank v. 41, 74 ——, Chamberlain v. 17 Dower v. Richards ——, Richards v. Downey v. Rogers Downing, Tuck v. Downs, John Drake, Gilpin Co. v. v, Lacoe 519, 520 298, 519, 520, 726 40 710 351, 378 246 121, 165 XXV Edwards v. McClurg 44 —,, Spratt v. 544 Eells, Pendill v. 146 Egbert, Jamestown & Franklin R. Co. v. 105 —, McGinnis v. 288, 274, 311, 394 Ege z. Kille 701 7|85 Mining Co., Aurora Hill Con. M. 271, 338, 424 Eilers v. Boatman 199, 233, 330, 401 Hisemann, Albert 558 Elder v. Lykens NE Coal Co. 628, 629 Co. v. Draper v. Douglass 341] El Dorado W. & D. G. M. Co., Os- Driscoll v. Dunwoody 466! good v. 653, 671 —, Gilmore ». 677 | Eldredge, People v. 190 ——, Logan »v. 609 | Electro Magnetic M. & D. Co. v. Van Driver, Jones v. 380, 544] Auken 218 Drummond v. Long 246 | Eley’s Appeal 12, 14 Dubuque M. Co., Ahern v. 633 | Elgin Mining Co., Iron Silver M. Ducie v. Ford 424} Co. ». 453, 456, 459 Duff's Appeal 4, 18, 121| Elkhorn Mining Co., Black v. 9, 295, 296, Duffield v. Hue 82, 126, 150, ‘159, 734 328, 426 v. Rosenzweig 82, 702 | ——, Bright v. 370, 375, 410 Daffy v. Mix 318, 331, 388 | Ellet v. Campbell 495, 500 Duffy Quartz Mine 626 | Ellis v. Duncan 672 Duggan v. Davey 465, 741 | ——, Parsons v. 368, 414 Dughi v. Harkins 377 | —, Young v. 168 Duke v. Hague 76 | Emerson’s Appeal 739 Dulaney, Branagan v. 221, 408, 475 | Emery, Owings v. 16 Duncan, Ellis v. 672 | Emily Lode 361 —_»v. Hollidaysburg & Gap Iron Emma Lode 356 Works 734 | Emperor Wilhelm Lode 366 Dundas v. Muhlenberg 701 | Empire G. M. Co. v. Bonanza G. M. Dunham v. Loverock 764| Co. 694 Dunker, Lezart v. 557 | English v. Johnson 230, 241, 261, 288, *Dunlap, Allen v. - 249, 731 821, 825 Dunluce Placer Mine 200 | Ennis, Murley v. 295, 298, 344 Dunphy, Elijah M. 356 | Ensiminger v. McIntire 196 Dunwoody, Driscoll v. 466 | Enterprise Co.’s Appeal 739 Du Prat v. James 199, 281, 273, 809 | Enterprise M. Co. v. Rico-Aspen M. Durango L. & C. Co. 560} Co. 397, 495, 497 Durant v. Lexington Coal M. Co. 790 Enterprise 0. & G. Co. v. National Durkin v. Kingston Coal Co. 785, 792| Transit Co. 29 Duryea v. Boucher 245 | Equator Lode 365, 378, 404 — »v. Burt 756 | Equator M. & S. Co., Harris v. 322 Duval, Clark v. 196 | Equitable Gas Co., McGreg’ or v. 192,685 Dwight, Mays »v. 125 EaGce Salt Works 587, 566 Eaman v. Bashford 771 Earle, Arthur v. 544 Early, Grady v. 336 East Jersey Co. v. Wright 41, 55, 59, 172 Eaton v. Allegheny Gas Co. 172 ——, De Garcia v. 414 ——, United States v. 600 —— v. Wilcox 143, 158 Eclipse G. & S. M. Co. v. Spring 398, 463 Eclipse Mill Site Eddy v. Simpson 644, 670 Edwards v, Allouez Mining Co. 623 —, King v. 101, 148, 150, 199, 291, 304, 18, 580 Erhardt v. Boaro 215, 208, 236, 286, 309, 722 Erickson v. Michigan L. & I. Co. 580, 679 Erie Lode v. Cameron Lode 367 Ervin, Clark v. 201, 482, 545 Erwin’s Appeal 133, 612 Eshleman, Charles v. 759, 760 Esler v. Townsite of Cooke 507, 524 Esmeralda M. Co., Great Eastern M. Co. v. 874, 407 Esmond v. Chew 609, 648 Esterly’s Appeal 7179 Estievenard, Coal Co. v. 791 510 | Etowah & Battle Branch M. Co., Im- boden wv. 660 Etting v. Potter 381 Eureka Case 417, 488, 445, 448, 450, 478 Eureka, Jenny Lind v. 364, 403 XXVi Eureka Con. M. Co. v. Richmond M. Co. 417, 488, 445, 448, 450, 478 Eureka Gulch M. Co., Hunt v. 896 Eureka Hill M. Co., Bullion, Beck & Champion M. Co. v. 470 Eureka Lake Co., Weaver v. 649 Eureka Lake & Yuba Canal Co. »v. Superior Court 726 Eureka M. Co., Southern Cross G. & 8. M. Co. ». 221, 233, 249 Evans v. Haefner 187 ——, McGillivray v. 749 — v. Rendall 404 ——, Zollars v. 216, 449 Everett » Hydraulic Flume T.Co. 666 Evins, Lorenzo D. 5638 Ewing v. Hartman 543 —— v. Sandoval C. & M. Co, 579 Excelsior No. 1, Black Queen v. 414 Fapian v. Collins 656, 669 Fairbanks v. Woodhouse 287 Fairchild v. Fairchild 18, 42, 47, 121 Fairfield v. Wyoming V. Coal Co. 769 Falk, Quirk v. 348 Fall, Silver Mining Co. v. 742 Falls v. McAfee 781, 738 Farley v. Spring Valley M.& I. Co. 664 Farnsworth, Ulmer »v. 634 Farnum v. Platt 83, 84, 585 Farquharson, Meyers v. 348 Farrand v. Marshall 687 Faxon v. Barnard 197, 244, 254, 320 Feather River Co., Jackson v. 341 Federy, Beard v. 419 Felger v. Coward 343 Fell v. Rich Hill Coal M. Co. 790 Fellows, Griffin v. 8, 12, 17 Fennel v. Guffey 112, 139, 163 Ferguson v. Belvoir M. & M. Co. 279, 316 TABLE OF CASES. Fitzgerald v. Clark 468. v. Urton 196 Flagstaff S. M. Co. v. Cullins 779 —, Cullins v. 779 —— v. Tarbet 448, 454, 692 Flaherty v. Gwinn 242, 290 Flanagan, Bullard v. 559: Flavin v. Mattingly 247 Fleetwood Lode 532 Fleming O. & G. Co. v. South Penna. O. Co. 112 Fletcher, Bewick >. 128 —, Hanson v. 250, 259 —, Mills v. 278 ——, Phenix Water Co. »v. 649 Flick v. Gold Hill & Lee Mountain M. Co. 220, 248: Florence Oil Co., Harrington v. 747 Florida Ry. & Nav. Co., Tucker v. 540- Flory v. Heller 117 Flynn v. Coal Co. 108 Fontanet M. Assn., Shull v. 774 Foote v. National Mining Co. 219, 258, 466. Forbes vr. Gracey 5, 319, 345 Ford, Canfield v. 41, 750 —, Ducie v. 424 —, Hobart v. 665. Forst, Hooks v. 175 Forsyth v. Wells 701 Fort Scott C. & M. Co. v. Sweeney 93 49 & 56 Quartz M. Co., Brown v. 462 Foss, Bissell v. 754 Foster, Frank 556. — v. Runk 8&6 —— v. Weaver 715 420 Mining Co. v. Bullion Mining Co. 388, 400, 572 Fowler, Atherton »v. 821, 423, 534 Fox, Deep River G. M. Co. v. 731 Francoeur v. Newhouse 198, 538, 570 Frank G. & S. M. Co. v. Larimer M. — v. Hanson 352, 868} &S. Co. 389 ——,, Hooper »v. 377 | Frankenfield, Periepi v. 7719 —,, Magalia G. M. Co. »v. 877 | Franklin Co. v. Coal Co. 15, 51 v. Neville 205 | Franklin Coal Co., Gloninger v. 56, 63 ——, Powell v. 414 v. McMillan 9, 697 Fernandez v. Burleson 773 | Franklin Lode 402 Ferrell v. Hoge = 214, 220, 222, 480, 482 | Franklin Mining Co. v. O’Brien 746 , Moore »v. 727 | Franklinite Co., Zine Co. v. 181, 182 Fett, Goller v. 842, 348, 745 | Frazier, Manning v. 88, 69, 119 Field v, Gray 324 | Freck v. Locust Mt. Coal Co. 126, 701 Fifteenth District Court, Goodale v. 738 | Freer v. Stotenburg 16 Findlay v. Smith 15, 605 | Frees v. Colorado 582 Findley v. Armstrong 590 | Freezer v. Sweeney 199, 359, 480 Fire Brick Co., Goss v. 139 | Fremont, Merced M. Co. v. 824, 385, 721, Fire Creek Coal & Coke Co., State v. 770 First National Bank v. Bissell 754 ——,, Princeton M. Co. v. 207 —— v. Sheafer 142 —— v. Suessenbach Fishback v. Miller Fisher v. Milliken 187 ——, Seymour »v. 282, 258, 396, 427 — v. Worrall 714 345, 897, 521 712 724 — v. Seals 570 French v. Brewer 720 — v. Lancaster 546 ——, Rush v. 210, 286, 802, 824, 334, 340 Fretts, Venture Oil Co. v, 77, 174, 176 Frey v. Lowden ' 654 Frick Coke Co., Moreland v. 574 Fricke Coke Co., Lewey v. 702 TABLE OF CASES, XXVil Fricke Coke Co., Rainey v. 20 | Gibson v. Oliver 165 Fricot, Attwood | v. 288, 322, 325, 341 | ——, Paris 532 ¥riedensville Zinc Co., Doster v. 134, 612 | —— v. Tyson 183 Friend v. Porter 185 | ——, Williams v. 87, 578 Frietas, Correa v. 663 | Giffin v. Southwest Pa. Pipe Lines 708 Fritzler v. Robinson 92 | Gilbert, Hughes v. 865° Frohner, Meyendorf v. 313, 428 | —, Scranton ». 116 Frorer v. People 767 | Gilchrist’s Appeal 182 Fuller v. Harris 209, 244, 252 | Gill, Richard 558 -—— v. Swan River Mining Co. 610, 655, | —— v. Weston 142 726 | Gillan v. Hutchinson 196 Fullerton, Little Josephine M. Co. v. 474 | Gillett, Quigley v. 278, 394 Fulmer’s Appeal 28 | .—— v. Treganza 66 Fulmer, Boyer v. 89, 90, 99 | Gillis, Ryckman v. 60, 688 -——, Williams v. 627 | ——, Stinchfield v. 474 Fulton, Caldwell v. 42, 44, 56, 63, 65, 73, | Gilmore v. Driscoll 677 77, 7, 588 | — v. Ontario Iron Co. 109 Funk v, Haldeman 32, 59, 64, 77, 80, 82 | Gilpin v. Sierra Nevada Con. M. Co. 465, —— v. Sterrett . 326, 337 728 Furnace Co., Sloan v. 44, 85 | Gilpin Co. v. Drake 246 ‘Garrner, Kamphouse v. Gage, Continental Co. v. Gaines v. Mining Co. Gale v. Best 536 — , Davis v. 651, 668, 670 v. Petroleum Co. 78 Galena M. & S. Co., Tousley v. 185 Galey v. Kellerman 111, 158, 161 Gallagher, Basey v. 64: — v. Kemmerer ——, Keystone M. Co. v. Galloway v. Campbell Gamble, Montooth v. Gamer v. Glenn 66, 69, 124 411 Bl 627 773 738 42, 46, 48, 129 248 3 | Glasgow v. Chartiers Oil Co. Ginocchio v. Amador Canal & M. Co. 343 Girard v. Carson 428 —, Miller v. 299 Girard Coal Co. v. Wiggins 789 Gird v. California Oil Co. 198, 280, 234, 245, 260, 266, 272 Giroux v. Scheurman 414 Gisborn, Houtz v. 346 Glacier Mountain S. M.Co. v. Willis 286, 328, 384, 496, 570 165 Gleeson v. Martin White M. Co. 225, 233, 239, 298, 300 Glenn, Gamer v. 248 ——, O’Donnell v. 220, 288, 248, 250 Gloniger v. Franklin Coal Co. Ganter v. Atkinson 53 | Godcharles v. Wigeman 769 Gardner v. Resumption M. & S. Co. 772 | Goddard’s Appeal 138 ‘Garfield M. & M. 884 | Godfrey, Nesbit v. 143 v. Hammer 206, 247, 329 | Goetz, Oliver v. 152 ——, Hammer v. 204, 245, 202, 329 | Gold Hill & Lee Mountain M. Co., ‘Garman v. Potts 97| Flick v. | 220, 248 Garner, Watkins v. 559 | Gold Hill Q. M. Co. v. Ish 178 Garringer, Woolman v. 656 | Gold Lead G. & S. M. Co., Steel v. 305, Garrison, Uhlig v. 546 401 ‘Garthe v. Hart 327, 344 | Gold Run D. & M. Co., People »v. 621 ‘Gartside v. Outley 51 | Gold Springs & Denver an, Mill Site 509 Garvey v. Gunther Gary v. Todd ‘Gaston v. Plum Gatewood v. McLaughlin Geiger v. Green 71 200, 545 56 341 Golden Fleece G. & 8. M. Co. v. Cable Con. G. & S. M. Co. 199, 207, 298, 314, 400 Golden Gate M. Co. v. Superior Court 726 356 7 | Golden Sun M. Co. 5 ‘Gelcich v. Moriarty 196, 230, 326 | Golden Terra Co. v. Smith 219, 546 General Elec. Co., Hewitt v. 128 | Goller v. Fett 342, 343, 745 Genet v. Delaware & Hudson Canal Gonu v. Russell 276, 313 Co. 42, 101, 578, 582, 611, 635 | Good, Sillingford ». 121 George, Western Penna. Gas Co. v. 143 | Good Return Mining Co. 279, 350, 362, Georgia Slate Co. v. Davitte 727 409 Gerhauser, R. T. 356, 481 | Goodale v. Fifteenth District Court 738 ‘German Coal Co., Sholl v. 145, 585, 593 | Goodwill, State v. 770 Germania Coal Co., Gray v. 792 | Gore v. McBrayer 211, 234, 288, 341 434 297 361 Germania Iron Co. v. United States Geyser Quicksilver M. Co., Stone v. Gibson, A. J. Gorman Mining Co. v. Alexander 207 Gormley, Lyon v. 6, 187, 597 , Wettengel v. 76, 77 XXVIil Gorrell, Locust Mountain Coal Co. v. 635 ——, Prevost v. 632 Goss v. Fire Brick Co. 139 Gourdier v. Cormack 687 Gowdy v. Kismet G. M. Co. 365, 868, 410, 414 Gracey, Forbes v. 5, 819, 345 Grady v. Early 836 Graham v. a Oriel C. & C. Co. 793 —, Rockwell v. 394, 665 Grampian Lode 279, 406 Granby M. & 8. Co., Chynowitch ». 71 — »v. Turley 775 Grand View M. & 8. Co, Bailey v. 366 Granger Coal Co., Carl v. 92 Granite Mountain 'M. Co., Weinstein v. 412 ——., West Granite Mountain M. Co. v. 232 Grant, Law v. 716 —, Weist v. 715 Gray, Field v. 824 — v. Germania Coal Co. 792 —, Hose v. 141 —, Roach v. 287 —— v. Truby 218 Gray Eagle Placer, Hawkeye Placer v. 413 Great Eastern M. Co. v. Esmeralda M. Co. 874, 407 Great Western Lode Claim 366 Green v. Ashland Iron Co. 6 —, Geiger v. 57 —, Inhabitants of Worcester v. 39, 580 ——, Keeler v. 114 — v. Putnam 580 Green River Coal Assn., Mc Williams v. TABLE OF CASES. Grubb v. Guilford 61, 64 Gruber v. Baker 712 Grunsfield, Alfred 558. Guano Co., State v. 182, 703 Guffey v. Clever 140: —, Fennel v. 112, 189, 168 v. Hukill 168, 169 —, Hukill v. 168 —, Wolf v. 166 Guffy, Williams v. 100 Guilford, Grubb v. 61, 64 Gumbert v. Kilgore 673, 683 —, McCracken v. 587 Gunboat, Terrible v. 208 Gunnison C. M. Co. 860, 408 Gunther, Garvey v. 71 Gwillim v. Donnellan 391 Gwinn, Flaherty v. 242, 290 Haas, Slater v. 760: Haddock v. Commonwealth 783 Haefner, Evans v. 187 Haenssler v. Missouri Iron Co. 21 Haggin, Dougherty »v. 653. Hagland, Gustavus 8738, 407 Hague, Duke v. 76- —— v. Wheeler 33 Hail v. Reed 31 Haines, Vansickle v. 657 Hairston, Barksdale v. 66, 78 Haldeman v. Bruckhart 673 —, Funk v. 32, 59, 64, 77, 80, 82 Halden, Randolph v. 113. Hale, Robert S. 200, 481 —, Hall v. 274 Hale & Norcross G. & S. M. Co. v. 560, 561} Storey County 829 Greenough’s Appeal 121 | Hall v. Arnott 199, 310: Greensburg Fuel Co. v. Irwin Nat — , DesMoines v. 184 Gas Co. 83 | —— v. Hale 274 Gregg, H. M. 606 | —— v. Kearny 275 Gregory, Beatty v. 68, 69, 172 | ——, Kendall v. 587 — v, Harris 610 v. Litchfield 566- v. Pershbaker 214, 218, 288, 241, 478, | —— v. Street 874, 408 500 | ——, Sylvester v. 92 Gregovich, Sever v. 207, 314 | Halloway, Smith v, 186 Gribben v. Atkinson 93 | Hallowell, J. W. 556 Griffin, Deno »v. 278, 401, 428 | Haltenhoff, Whitman v. 368. — v. Fellows 8, 12, 17| Hamberg C. M. Co., Dolles v. 279 ——, Keeling v. 597 | Hamburg M. Co. v. Stephenson 506 —, Southern Pac. R. Co. ». 876, 540| Hamerstag, Moore v. 211, 344 Griffith, Priddy v. 9| Hamilton v. Anderson 560 —, Waters v. 57 | —— v. Jutte 769: Grogan, Springside Coal M. Co. ». 782, | ——, Righter v. 18 789 | —~ v. Southern Nevada G. & S. M. Gropper v. King 292, 329} Co. 822, 391, 424, 570: Grosfield v. Nigger Hill Con. M. Co. 493} ——, Speake v. 658 Ground Hog Lode v. Parole 412 v, State . 781 Grove v. Hodges 63 | ——, Tennessee ©. & I. Co. v. 620 Grubb’s Appeal 27, 28, 65, 738, 764 | Hammer v. Garfield M. & M. Co. 204, 302, Grubb v. Bayard 56, 59, 61, 67 245, 329, 334 ——, Coleman v. 24 | ——, Garfield M.& M. Co. v. 206, 247, —— v. Grubb 27, 28, 64, 65 329 TABLE OF CASES. Hancock, Natoma W. & M. Co. v. 654 Hand G. M. Co. v. Parker 660 Hanna, Reynolds v. 11 Hanover Coal Co., Rockafellow v. 588, 588 378 Hansen, Mulligan vw xxix Hawke, Robert 435 Hawkeye Placer v. Gray Eagle Placer aa Hawkins v. Pepper —— v. Spokane H. M. Co. 78 i Haws v. Victoria Copper M. Co. 241, 334 Hanson, Ferguson »v. 352, 368 | Hay, Lowry »v. 683. ». Fletcher 250, 259 | ——, Williams »v. 684 Hardeman, Cowan v. 683 Hayden v, Jamison 201, 545. Hardenbergh ». Bacon 348 | Hayes, Alden Gulch Con. M.C.v. 656 Hardin, Frank P. 605 | Hays v. Briggs 598 Harding v. People 768 | —— v. Risher 595, 598 Hardt v. Liberty Hill Con.M.& W. | Hazlett, Clary v. 490: 0. 618 | Headlight Lode 854 Hare v. McIntire 790 | Healer, Wesley City Coal Co. v. 787 Hargrove v. Robertson 510) Heaney v. Butte & Montana Com. Co. Harkins, Dughi v. 377 ‘ 604, 729: Harkness, Bradley v. 752, 755 | Heathcock, Ross »v. 127 —— v. Burton 15, 70 | Heckman’s Estate 121 Harlan v. Lehigh C.& Nav. Co. 44, 95| Hecksher v. Sheafer 116, 683. Harlow v. Lake Superior I.Co. 16, 51, 58} Hecla Consolidated M. Co. 508, 509 Harney Peak T. M. M. & M. Co., Heffner v. Lewis 129 Marshall »v. 226, 294 | Heil v. Strong 17 Harnish v. Wallace 544 | Heintz v. Shortt 164 Harrington v. Chambers 221, 389, 401 | Heller, Flory v. 117 —, Chambers v. 263, 269, 389) Helm v. Chapman 772 v. Florence Oil Co. 747 | Henderson v. Allen 755 —, Johnston v. 555 | Hendree, Atkins v. 258, 812. Harris v. Equator M. & S. Co. 322 | Hendricks v. Spring Valley M. & I. , Fuller v. 209, 244, 252| Co. 686, 694 ——, Gregory v. 610 | Hendrix v. McBeth ' 9: —— v. Lloyd 763 | ——, McDowell v. 92, 120, 171 —— v. Tyson 714 | Hendsch, Parks v. 201 Harmison: F.P. 261, 279, 315, 360, 374, 480 | Henke, Lenfers v. 9, 749: Harsh, Albert F. 407 | Henley, John C. 563 Hart, Baker v. 52, 61, 700} Henning, Muhlenberg v. 96, 98- —., Cheesman v. 241, 455 | Henry, Davis v. 716 ——, Garthe »v. 327, 344 | —— v. Lowe 699 —— v. Plum “ —, Wilson »v. 674, 575 Hartford Co. v. Miller 0 | Hense, Sullivan v. 290, 327 Hartford I. M. Co. v. Cambria M. Co. a Henshaw ». Clark 196, 198, 725- 698 | Herbert v. King 276, 304, 337 Hartley, Ackerman »v. 52, 729 | Hermocilla v. Hubbell 530: Hartman, Ewing v. 543 | Herter, Thomas Pressed Brick Co. ». 696 —— v. Smith 505 | Hess v. Winder 821, 322, 825, 725 Hartwell v. Camman 40 | Hewitt v. General Elec. Co. 128 Hartzell, Commonwealth v. 770 | Heydenfeldt v. Daney G. M. Co. 418,. Harvey v. Chilton 647 527, 580: —— v. Lloyd 595 | Hickey, M. A. & E. 524 —v. Ryan 237, 289 | Hicks v. Bell 178, 196 —-»v. Sides S. M. Co. 611 | —— v. Consolidated Coal Co. 774 —— v. Thomas 594, 595 v. Jennings 706 Harvey’s Heirs, Anderson v. 736 | Higgins v. Armstrong 751, 760: Haskell, Orr v. 292 | Hilgard, Daniels v. 781 Hasson v. Oil Creek & Allegheny R. Hill v. Joy 105. Co. 586 | —— v. King 620, 646. Hastings, Walsh v. 555 —- v. Newman 644 Hatch, Shoemaker v. 665 | —— v. Pardee 685. Hatry, Ogden v. 163 | —— ». Smith 621, 650: Hauck, John C. 357 | ——, Smith v. 621 Hauswirth v. Butcher 258 | —— v. Taylor 737 Haverty, Murray v. 21 | ——, Whiting »v. 711 Hawesville v. Hawes’ Heirs 185, 696 Hillside C. & o Co., Kingsley v. 42, 47, Hawke, Deffeback v. 197, 872, 423, 514, 573 515, 617, 618, 624, 541 —, Plummer »v. 48, 77, 175, 574 XXX Himes v. Johnson 653 Hindman »v. Rizor 667 Hindson v. Markle 629 Hirbour v. Reeding 212, 345 Hirschler v. McKendricks 277 Hitchcock, Patterson v. 224, 463 Hobart v. Ford 665 v. Murray 40, 51 Hobbs v. Amador & Sacramento Canal Co. 622 Hoch v. Bass 158, 161, 734 — , Nelson v. 681 Hodge, Ray »v. 107 Hodges, Groves v. 63 Hodgson v. Perkins 78, 177 Hoffman v. Beecher 399 —— v. Stone 645, 670 —— vv. Tuolumne County W.Co. 666 v. Venard 367 Hoge, Ferrell v. 214, 220, 222, 480, 482 Hogzgin, J. B. 507 Hoke, Carter v. 738 Holdman, Darragh v. 544 Holland v. Mount Auburn G. Q. M. Co. 230 Holley, Marsh »v. 20, 746 Holliday, Dobschuetz v. 128 Hollidaysburg & Gap Iron Works, Duncan v. 734 8,12, 17 Hollinshead v. Allen Holter, Columbia M. Co. v. Honaker v. Martin 277, 314 Honeyman v. Thomas. 778 Honor v. Roberts 791 Hook v. Latham 208 Hooks v. Forst 175 Hooper v. Ferguson 377 Hope’s Appeal 46, 48 Hope Mining Co., In re 777 — v. Brown 397, 498, 499, 502 Hopkins v. Hudson 774 v. Noyes 829, 345 Horan, McCormick v. 624 Horner v. Watson 636 Horner & Roberts’ Lateral Railroad 695 Horrid v. Old Missouri 859, 402 im Horswell v. Ruiz 827, 463 Hosie v. Gray 141 Hoskinson, Sayers v. 31 Hosmer, Reynolds v. 663 Houghton v. McDermott 380 Houtz v. Gisborn 346 Howard, Maguire v. 672 —,, Michael 880, 472 Howe, Bohanon v. 206 Howell, Decker v. 757 Hoy v. Smith 700 Hoyt, Parks Canal & M. Co. v. 653 Hubbell, Hermocilla v. 530 Huber, Welland v. 212 Huddell, Zn re 137 Hudson, Hopkins v. 774 Hudson Iron Co., Stockbridge Iron Co. v. 67, 59, 84 TABLE OF CASES. Hudson Mining Co. 509 Hue, Duffield v. 82, 126, 150, 159, 734 Huff v. McCauley 64, 72 —, Van Vankenburg »v. 212 Hughes v. Devlin 825, 749 — »v. Gilbert 365 — ». United Pipe Lines 82, 700 v. Westmoreland Coal Co. 126 Hugunin v. McCunniff 694 Hukill v. Guffey 168 —, Guffey v. 168, 169 — v. Myers 169 —, Schaupp ». 168 —, Thomas v. 169, 734 Hull v. McDonald 20 Hume, Brennan v. 558 Humphrey, Burgner v. 120, 680 Humphreys, Donnel v. 669 Hungarian Hill Gravel M. Co. v. Moses 668 Hunnewill, Kirman v. 671 Hunt v. Eureka Gulch M. Co. 396 — v. Patchin 210, 891, 409, 570 — v. Steese 586, 726 Hunter, Devereux »v. 378 ——,, Preston v. 241, 251 — v. Savage C. S. M. Co. 1717 Huntsville C. & M. Co., Austin v. 40, 120, 698 Hurd, Childs v. 122, 142 Hurlbut, P. D. 606 Husby, Brady v. 249 Hussey Lode, L. B. 409 Hutchinson, Gillan v. 196 —, Zeckendorf v. 346 Hutchison, Commonwealth v. 784 Hydraulic Flume T. Co., Everett v. 666 Hyman, McEvoy »v. 251, 891, 423 —, Meyer »v. 874, 409 —— v. Wheeler 454 Ipano Co., Jordan v. 200 Illinois Coal Co. v. Ogle 696 Illinois S. M. & M. Co. v. Raff 469 Imboden v. Etowah & Battle Branch M. Co. 660 Independence Lode 862 Independent Ditch Co.,Leigh Co.v. 646 Indianapolis Nat. Gas Co. v. Kibbey 124, 728 Inhabitants of Worcester v. Green 39, 580 Intervenor M. Co., Tilden v. 365 Iola Lode Case 406 Iowa v. Bonanza 406 Iowa Gulch M. Co. v. Roseville Alta M. Co. 845 Trish, Ramelli v. 665 Iron King M. & M. Site 508 Iron Mine v. Loella Mine 449 Tron Silver M. Co. v. Campbell 892, 64, 489 —— v. Cheesman 460 TABLE OF CASES. XXX1 Tron Silver M. Co. v. Elgin M. Co. 453, | Johns v. Marsh 380 456, 459 | Johnson v. Buell 464 —— v. Mike & Starr M. Co. 411,456, 489 |——, Creswell M. Co. v. 378 -—— v. Reynolds 486 | ——, Donahue v. 330 ——., Reynolds v. 331, 333, 483, 485 /——, English v. 230, 241, 261, 288, 321, — v. Sullivan 485 3825 —, Sullivan v. 485, 490 | ——, Himes v. 653 , United States v. 350, 482, 478, 487 | —— «. McLaughlin 287, 302 Irons, Bowman v. 710 | ——, Solliday v. 182 Irvine, O’Connor v, 426 | —— v. South Dakota 560 Irwin v. Covode 12 | ——, Washington Nat. Gas Co. v. 138 —— v. Davidson 731 v. Young 312 — v. Phillips 644 | Johnston v. Cowan 63 Irwin Nat. Gas Co., Greensburg Fuel —, Dark v. 382, 80 Co. v. 3 | —— v. Harrington 555 Isaksen, Long v. 202 v. Morris 529 Isenberg, Commonwealth v. 769 v. Price 747 Ish, Gold Hill Q. M. Co. v. 178 | Johnstone v. Robinson 209 Ison v. Nelson M. Co. 643 Johnstown Iron Co. v. Cambria Iron Ivanhoe M. Co. v. Keystone Con. M. Co. 56, 62, 64, 66, 73 Co. 195, 528, 5380 | Jones, Chambers v. 523 Ives, Rosenthal v. 291, 397, 479 | —— v. Clark 757 —, Clark v. 160 —, Clegg v. 737 Jacks, Pereira v. 532 | ——, Coal Run Coal Co. v. 782 Jackson v. Dines 206, 247 | ——, Commonwealth v. 785 —— v. Feather River Co. 341 v. Driver 880, 544 ——,, Jones v. 608 | —— v. Jackson 608 — v. Roby 269, 389 | ——, James A. 561, 562 ——, Thomas J. 561 | —— v. Mahaska County Coal Co. 593 v. Walton 704 | —— v. People 767 Jackson Mining Co. 350 | —— v. Prospect M. Co. 443, 468 Jacob v. Lorenz 665 | —— v. Robertson 633 ——, Lorenz v. 664 | ——, Robertson »v. 695 Jacobs, Thompson v. ’ 278 | ——, Rounsley v. 126 James, DuPrat v. 199, 231, 273, 309 | —— v. Strong 13 v. Williams 651 | —— v. Wagner 677, 681 Jamestown & Franklin R. Co. v. Eg- —— v. West Penna. Nat. Gas Co. 164 bert 105 | —— Williamson v. 16, 29, 34, 789 Jamie Lee Lode v. Little Forepaugh Joplin M. Co., Clowser v. 19 Lode 1| Jordan, Alice 562 Jamison, Baker v. 194 | —— Davidson v. 709 ——, Hayden ». 201, 545 v. Idaho Co. 200 Jantzen v. Arizona Copper Co. 205, 280, | Joy, Hill v. 105 237, 241 | Judd, Merritt v. 128 Jefferson Gas Co., Davis v. 192, 685 | Judge v. Braswell 762 ——, Wallace v. 193 | Juniata Lode 498 Jefferson G. & S. M. Co., Pralus v. 289, | Junkans v. Burgin 654 326 | Jupiter M. Co. v. Bodie Con. M. Co. 217, Jeffray, Mary E. 561 229, 240, 244, 257, 269, 285, 302, 450 Jenkins v. Clyde Coal Co. 143 | Justice v. Alabama 562 , State v. 770 | Justice M. Co., Book v. 210, 218, 229, 271, Jennings v. Beale 65, 735 9 —, Hicks v. 706 | —— v. Lee 427 —, Proctor »v. 657 | ——, Lee »v. 206 — v. Rickard 709 | Jutte, Hamilton v. 769 Jennison v. Kirk 660, 666 Jenny Lind v. Eureka 364, 403 Jepson, Roberts v. 377 | Kann v. Central Smelting Co. 754 Jeremy v. Thompson 567 | —— v. Old Telegraph M. Co. 283, 429, Jerome v. Ross 723, 730, 786 465, 736, 747 Jess, Wilms v. 678 | Kamphouse »v. Gaffner 56, 69, 124 Jillson, Anthony v. 206, 231, 242, 394] Kane v. Devine 378 John Dare S. M. Co., Leet v. 298 ' Kannaugh v. Quartette M. Co. 396 XXXIi TABLE OF CASES, Kansas City M. & M. Co. v. Clay 642 | King Bridge Co., St. Anthony Falls K. C., St. J. & C. B. R.Co., Childs v. 21] W.P. Co. »v. 185 Karns v. Tanner 156 | King of the West, City Rock wv. 404 Kearney, Hall v. 275 | Kingdom, Bliss v. 663 ——, Swain v. 561] Kings County v. Alexander 557 Keeler v. Green 114 | Kingsley v. Hillside C.&I.Co. 42, 47, — v. Trueman 828, 396 ‘, 573 Keeley, Patchen v. 830, 699 | Kingston Coal Co., Durkin v. 785, 792 Keeling v. Griffin 597 | Kinkaid, John 362 Kellerman, Galey v. 111, 158, 161 | Kirk, Jennison v. 660, 666 Kelly, Conlin v. 201, 480, 482 | ——, Titcomb v. 663 v. Donahoe 186 | Kirman v. Hunnewill 671 —— v. Natoma W. & M. Co. 644 | Kirtley, Marshall S. M. Co. v. 395 —— v. Taylor 287 | Kismet G. M. Co., Gowdy v. 365, 368, Kemble v. Kemble 22 410, 414 Kemble C. & I. Co. v. Scott 96, 98 | Kistler v. Thompson 685 Kemmerer, Gallagher v. 627 | Kitchen v. Smith 76, 133 Kemp, St. Louis Smelting & Refining Kleppner v. Lemon 105, 111 Co. v. 260, 261, 268, 359, 360, 418, 421, | Kline v. Stephan 431 433, 478, 543 | Knabe, Julius P. 562 Kempton Mine 862, 369 | Knapp, Joseph M. 261, 481 Kendall v. Hall 557 | Kneeland v. Norton 547 v. San Juan S. M. Co. 545 | Knight v. Coal Co. 38 Kendall Mountain Placer 357 | ——, Thomas M. 562 Kenkle, McShane v. 220 | Knisley, Rucker v. 379 Kennedy v. Crawford 162 | Koch’s Appeal 102, 103 Kenrick v. Smick 160, 161 | Koch, Dargin v. 382, Kentucky Coal Co., Reliance Coal Koegel, Berg ~. 251 Co. v. 590 | Koen v. Bartlett 15 Kentucky & Montana G. & S. M. Co., Kollock, Zn re eae Smallhouse v. 775 Kern, Rerick v. Kerr, Parley’s Park S. M. Co. v. 257, 286 v. Utah-Wyoming Improvement ne 556 Keystone Con. M. Co. v. California 531 ——, Ivanhoe M. Co. v. 195, 528, 5380 Keystone L. & M. Site v. Nevada 532 Keystone M. Co. v. Gallagher 778 —, Patterson v. 342 Khern, G. A. 355, 481 Kibbey, Indianapolis N. G. Co. v. —‘124, 728 Kidd v. Laird 648, 655 —, Nevada C. & 8. Co. v. 652 —, St. John »v. 808, 842 Kier v. Peterson 17, 82, 188 —,, Richardson v. 666 Kilgore, Gumbert v. 678, 688 Kilham, Parke v. 645, 662 Kille, Ege z, 701 Kincaid v. McGowan 38 King v. Amy & Silversmith M. Co. 458, 460, 467, 468 ——v. Edwards 101, 148, 150, 199, "291, 304, 318, 580 ——, Gropper v. 292, 329 ——, Herbert v. 276, 304, 337 ——, Hill v. 620, 646 —— v. Randlett 342 —, Talbott v. 3872, 898, 428, 521, 522 v. Thomas 622, 571 —., United States v. 484 80 | Kramer v. Settle Komiskey, Plymouth Co. v 212, 249, 264, 276, 04 Krause v. Morgan 791 Kreiser, Blindert v. 74 Kreutz, McKnight v. 109, 155, 156 Kroll, Wesling v. 170 Kunkle, Spencer v. 126 Lacey v. Woodward 278 Lachman, Skillman cv. 754, 766 Lackawanna & Bloomsburg R. Co., Searle v. 190, 191 Lackawanna Coal Co., Lillibridge v. 37, 47, 87, 145, 587, 588, 589 Lacoe, Drake v. 121, 165 Lacustrine Fertilizer Co. v. Lake Guano & Fertilizer Co. 4, 6, 41 Ladley v. Creighton 141 Lafave, Seidler v. 249 Laird, Kidd v. 648, 655 Lake Champlain Granite Co., Arm. strong v. 1383 Lake Guano & Fertilizer Co., Lacus- trine Fertilizer Co. v. 4, 6, 41 Lake Superior Co. v. McCann 128 Lake Superior Iron Co., Harlow v. 16, 51, 58 Lakin v. Dolly 257, 359 —— v. Roberts 257, 425 —— v. Sierra Buttes G. M. Co. 271, "302, 309 Lamb, Colorado C. & I. Co. v. 786 —, Milton v. 862 TABLE OF CASES. XXXiii Lambard, Melton v. 343, 745 | Leigh Co. v. Independent DitchCo. 646 Lammers, Cowell v. 422, 534 | Leininger’s Appeal 733 Lamotte Lead Co., Lunsford v. 71| Leitham v. Cusick 718, 735 Lancaster, French v. 546 | Lemon, Kleppner v. 105, 111 Lance v. Lehigh & Wilkesbarre Coal LeNeve Mill Site 508 Co. 134, 583, 589, 613 | Lenfers v. Henke 9, 749 Landon, Barnum v. 746 | Lennig, Charles 507 Lane, Bronson v. 76, 583 | Lennon, McLean County C.Co.v. 696 Laney, Thomas J. 435, 524 | Lentz v. Carnegie 628 Lantzy, Powell v. 49 | ——v. Victor 335 Largent, Edward B. 559 | Leonard v. Peoples 709 Largey v. Black 493 | Leport v. Mining Co. 5, 18 —, Blue Bird M. Co. v. 456 | LeRoy v. Wright 723 Larimer M. & S. Co., Frank G. & S. LeSieur, Darger v. 249 M. Co. v. 389 | Leslie v. Rich Hill C. M. Co. 790 Larkin v. Upton 217, 220, 456 | Levaroni v. Miller 196 LaSalle, Matthiessen & Hegeler Zinc Levitt, Snell v. 323 Co. v. 184, 585 | Lewey v. Fricke Coke Co. 702 ~——, Union Coal Co. v. 184 | Lewis, Chevington & Bunn Co. v. 115 Last Chance M. Co. v. Tyler M. Co. 426, |——, Heffner v. 129 457, 460 | -——, Northern Pacific R. Co. v. 604 —, Tyler M. Co. v. 461 | Lewishon, Catron v. 414 Latham, Hook v. 208 | Lewisohn, Mattingly v. 277, 399 Lavelle, Moritz v. 211 Lexington Coal M. Co., Durant vy. 740 Law v. Grant 716 | Lezeart v. Dunker 557 Lawrence’s Appeal 190, 681 | Liberty Hill Con. M. & W. Co., Lawrence v. Robinson 759| Hardt v. 618 Lazarus’ Estate 42, 48 | Lillibridge v. Lackawanna Coal Co. 37, Leach, Watervale M. Co. v. 474 47, 87, 145, 587, 588, 589 Lead City Townsite v. Mineral Claim- Lincoln v. Rodgers 611 ants 436 | Lincoln Lode 405 Leadville Lode, Little Pauline v. 279, 315; Lincoln Placer 351, 356 Leary v. Manuel 208, 412 | Lineoski v. Susquehanna Coal Co. 792 Leatherman v. Oliver 164 | Linton C. & M. Co. v. Persons 789 Leavers v. Cleary 579 | Lippincott, Mine Hill& S. H. R. Co. v. 190, Lebanon M. Co., Consolidated Repub- 681 lican Mountain M. Co. v. 212, 274 | Lipscomb v. Nichols 555 Lebanon M. Co. of N. Y. v. Consoli- Litchfield, Hall v. 566 dated Republican M. Co. 310, 887, 344, | Litchfield Coal Co. v. Taylor 787 695 | Little Chief Con. M. Co., Little Pitts- —, Wolfley v. 218, 290, 3538, 463, 464,/ burg Con. M. Co. v. 695 471 | Little Forepaugh Lode, Jamie Lee Ledger Lode 407,412] Lode »v. 411 Lee, Bradley v. 272, 326 | Little Giant Lode 414 —— v. Bumgardner 50, 66 | Little Josephine M. Co. v. Fullerton 474 —— v. Justice M. Co. 206 | Little Pauline v. Leadville Lode 279,315 —, Justice M. Co. v. 427 | Little Pet Lode 351 — v. Stahl 394, 475, 476 | Little Pittsburg Con. M. Co. v. Amie ——., Territory v. 206) M. Co. 217, 296, 340 ——, Thompson v. 646 | —— »v. Little Chief Con. M. Co. 695 ——, White v. 231, 479 | Little Schuylkill N. R. &C. Co. v. Rich- Lee Doon v. Tesh 205, 393] ards 625 Leet v. John Dare S. M. Co. 293 v. Tamaqua 680 LeFevre v. LeFevre 80 | Live Yankee Co. v. Oregon Co. 261 Leggatt v. Stewart 258 | Livingston v. Livingston 721 Lehigh Coal & Nav. Co., Harlan v. 44, 95 v. Moingona Coal Co. 679 Lehigh Valley Coal Co., Mulhern v. 792 |-—— v. Peru Iron Co. 713 Lehigh & Wilkesbarre Coal Co., Lizzie Bullock Mining Claims 355 Lance v. 134, 585, 589, 613 | Lloyd, Blair Iron Co. v. 701 — »v. Wright 99, 105, 122 | ——, Harris v. 763 Lehigh Zinc & Iron Co. v. Bamford 90, | ——, Harvey v. 595 119, 707 | Locke, Sprague v. 726 —, Bamford v. 90 | Lockhart v. Rollins 212, 276 —— v. New Jersey Z. & I. Co 182 ! Lockwood, Barnhart v. 77, 174 XXXIV Lockwood v. Lunsford 728 Locust Mountain Coal Co., Freck v. on 701 v, Gorrell 635 Loella Mine, Iron Mine v. 449 Loftis, McBee v. 66, 114, 144, 574 Logan v. Driscoll 60! —— v. Washington County 44, 115 Lone Dane Lode 222, 363 Long, Drummond v. 246 v. Isaksen 202 —, McLean County Coal Co. »v. 695 Loomis, State v. 768 Loose v. People 781 Lord v. Carbon Iron Mfg. Co. 684, o 30 Lorenz v. Jacob 664 —, Jacob x 665 v. Waldron 664 Louise Mining Co. 222, 482 Louisville Lode Case 365 Love, Abel v. 755 Lovelock, Nolan v. 762 Lovering, Cooper v. «711 Loverock, Dunham v. 764 Lowden, Frey v. 654 Lowe, Henry v. 699 Lower, Armstrong v. 199, 218, 310, or, 4 Lowery, Weimer v. 663 Lowry v. Hay 683 Lucas, Chester Co. v. 39, 125 Lucerne M. Co., Weill v. 299, 346 TLulay v. Barnes 127, 574 Lunsford v. LaMotte Lead Co. 71 —., Lockwood v. 728 Lyell, Burgan v. 762 Lykens Valley Coal Co. ». Dock 7, 188, 28, 629 183 715 167 Lyman v. Arnold Lynch’s Appeal Lynch »v. Versailles F. Gas Co. Lynn’s Appeal 12 Lyon, Charles 560 — v. Gormley 6, 187, 597 v. Miller 102, 701 -—, Shoenberger »v. 85 ——., Stratton v. 4 Mackey, Saunders v. 304, 313 Mackie, 8. F. 355, 361 Maeris v. Bicknell 645 Magalia G. M. Co. v. Ferguson 377 Maguire v. Howard 672 —, Souter v. 281, 242, 304, 310 Mahaska County Coal Co., Jones v. 598 Mallett v. Uncle Sam G. & S. M. Co. 292, 298, 299, 304, 305, 329, 763 Malone v. Big Flat Gravel-M. Co. 772 Maloney, Scott v. 414 Mammoth, Coney »v. 405 Mammoth Blue Gravel Co., Central Pac. R. Co. v. 537 9 | Manning v. Frazier TABLE OF CASES. Mammoth M. Co., Condon v. 364, 367 Mammoth Vein Con. Coal Co.’s Ap- peal 732 Manganese Co. v. Trotter 59, 581 Manhattan Ry. Co., White v. 323 Manhattan & San Juan S. M. Co. 362 38, 69, 119 395 398, 487, 490 — v. Strehlow Mantle v. Noyes —,, Noyes v. 398, 487, 490, 525 Manuel, Leary v. 208, 412 — v. Wulff 205, 206, 323, 340 —,, Wulff v. 399 Manufacturers’ Nat. Gas Co., Mc- Knight v. 101, 103 , Wills v. 112, 159, 163, 164, 165 Manville v. Parks 759, 760 Marden, Dodge v. 666, 671 Margaret M. Co., Morrill v. 200, 378, Be Marius v. Bicknell Markham, Paire v. 0 Markle, Hindson v. 629 Marks, Steiner v. 167 Marquart v. Bradford 297 Marriott, Miner v. 407 Marsh v. Holley 20, 746 ——, Johns v. 380 Marshall, Blakley v. 14 , Farrand v. 687 — vv. Harney Peak T.M.M. & M. Co. 226, 294 —— v. Mellon 14 —, Northern Pacific R. Co. v. 381 —, Wadsworth v. 790 Marshall S. M. Co. v. Kirtley 895 , United States v. 433 Martin, Honaker v. 277, 314 v. State 768 Martin White M. Co., Gleeson »v. 225, 238, 239, 293, 300 Marvin v. Brewster Iron M. Co. 41, 85, 572, 581, 679 Maryland Co., Atlantic Co. v. 697 Maske, J. D. 563 Masser, Tucker v. 260, 359, 478 Massini, More v. 725 Massot v. Moses 49 Masterson, C. P. 557 Mather v. Trinity Church 701 Mathews v. People’s Nat. Gas Co. 166 Matthieson & Hegeler Zine Co. v. La Salle 184, 585 Mattingly, Flavin v. 247 —— v. Lewisohn 277, 899 Maxwell v. Todd 102, 154 Maye v. Yappen 694 Mayer v. Carothers 571 Mayfield, Brundy v. 277, 804, 400, 409, 746 — , O’Gorman v. 560 Mayger, Robinson v. 406 Mays v. Dwight 125 McAfee, Falls v. 731, 738 McAllister, Ritchie v. 130 TABLE OF CASES. XXXV McBee v. Loftis 66, 114, 144, 574 | McGuire v. Wright 141 McBeth, Hendrix v. 9| McIntire, Ensiminger v. 196 McBrayer, Gore v. 211, 234, 288, 341 | ——, Hare v. 790 McBride, Washington v. 381, 582 | McIntyre v. McIntyre Coal Co. 109 McBurney v. Berry 250 | McKee v. Brooks 16 McCabe, Seager v. 10 | McKeever, Brandt v. 64, 182 McCaffrey, 'Tinkham v. 378, 544 | McKeig, McCauley »v. 623 McCahan v. Wharton 97, 98 | McKendricks, Hirschler v. 277 McCaig, Bryan v. 274, 895 | McKenzie, Barnard v. 773 McCaleb, Oolagah Coal Co. v. 723 | McKeon v. Bisbee 324 McCalmont Oil Co., Shepherd v. 32, 79, | McKinley v. Wheeler 203, 204, 206, 286 152| McKinney, Partridge v. 296, 670 McCann, Lake Superior Co. v. 128 | —— v. Smith 649 McCarthy, Eugene 857, 867, 539 | McKinstry v. Clark 318, 828 McCauley, Huff v. 64, 72 | McKnight, Kreutz v. 109, 155, 156 v. McKeig 623 v. Manufacturers’ N. G. Co. 101, 103 McCharles v. Roberts 382 v. Ratcliff 635 McClay, McCowan v. 251, 571 | McLaren v. Byrnes 774 McClintock v. Bryden 196 | McLaughlin v. Del Re 610 v. Dana 18 | ——, Gatewood ». 841 McCloskey v. Miller 586 | ——~, Johnson e. 287, 802 McClurg, Edwards v. 44 v. Thompson 219 McConnell v. Denver 756 | —— v. United States 533 —, William H. 560 | McLean County Coal Co. v. Lennon 696 McCord v. Mining Co. “745 v. Long 695 McCormick v. Baldwin 273 | McMaster, Samuel 407 — v. Horan 624 | McMillan, Franklin Coal Co. v. 9, 697 v. Sutton 521 , John 557 v. Varnes 239, 294, 470 | —— v. Philadelphia Co. 166 McCowan v. McClay 261, 571 | McNeil v. Pace 279, 315 McCoy, Natoma W. & M. Co. v. 650 | McNider, Bonesell v. 412 McCracken v. Gumbert 587 | McNish v. Stone 175 McCulloh, Blaen Coal Co. v. 697 | McNulty, Richardson v. 297, 336, 342 McCune, Colvin v. 571 250 McCunniff, Hugunin v. 694 | ——, Wiseman v. 302, 755 McDaniel v. Bell 558 | McPhee, Conner v. 247 McDermott, Houghton v. 880 | McShaffery, Castor v. 778 McDonald v. Askew 601, 668 | McShane v. Carter 344 v. Bear River & Auburn W. & — v. Kenkle 220 M. Co. 648 | McTarnahan v. Pike 571 —,, Burke v. 219, 225, 397, 465 —, Hull z. —— v. Montana Wood Co. 277, 280, 282 McWilliams v. Green River C. A. 560, ne 20 | Meacham v. Boydston 220, 222; 197, 268, 276, 304, 308, 314, 321, 329 Meagher, Belk v. ——, Trout v. 114, 678, 681 | —— v. Reed 760 McDowell, Baker v. 85 | Mechling, Collins v. 122 v. Hendrix 92, 120, 171 | Meister, Donahue v. 238, 290 — v. Simms 714 | Meistrell v. Reach 775 McEvoy v. Hyman 251, 391, 423 | Mellon, Marshall v. 14 McFerrin, Wade 563 | ——, Riddle v. 148, 173 McFeters v. Pierson 328, 604, 695 | Melton v. Lambard 848, 745 McGarrity v. Byington 272, 287, 297, 302 McGillicuddy v. Tompkins 559 McGillivray v. Evans 749 McGinnis v. Egbert 238, 274, 311, 394 McGlenn v. Wienbroeer 201, 482 McGoon v. Ankeny 610 McGowan ». Alps C. M. Co. 316 —— »v. Bailey 685, 744 , Kincaid v, 38 McGrath v. Bassick 275 McGregor v. Equitable Gas Co. 192, 685 McGrew, Chicago, Santa Fe & Cal. R. Co. v. 189 Merced M. Co., Boggs v. 196, 198, 421 —— v. Fremont 824, 335, 721, 724 Mercur v. State Line & Sullivan R. Co. 29 Merideth, Randall uv. 765 Merrill v. Dixon 536 Merritt v. Judd 128 Metcalf v. Prescott 245, 248, 251 Meyendorf v. Frohner 318, 428 Meyer v. Hyman 874, 409 Meyers 7. Farquharson 343 Miami Coal Co. v. Wigton 594 Michigan L. & I. Co., Deer Lake Co. v. 131 XXXVI Michigan L. & I. Co., Erickson v. 580, 679 Mickle v. Douglas 151, 679 Middlesex M. Co., Morgenson v. 475 Middleton, Taylor v. 231 Midland Blast Furnace Co., Clark v. 94 Migeon, Montana Central R. Co. v. 490 Mike & Starr M. Co., Iron Silver M. Co. v. 411, 456, 489 Miles v. Delaware & Hudson Canal 117 Co. Miller v. Butterfield 758 —— v. Chester Slate Co. 107 v. Cumberland Cotton Factory 774 712 ——, Fishback v. v. Girard 299 ——, Hartford Co. v. 20 —, Levaroni v. 196 ——, Lyon v. 102, 701 586 — , Moore v. 62, 58, 143 —— v. Taylor 225, 337 Millett v. People 767 Milligan v. Savery 829, 398 Milliken, F sher v. 187 Mills v. Fletcher 373 120 Milton v. Lamb 353 Mimbres M. Co. Minah Con. M. Co., Pelton v. Mine Hill & S. H. R. Co. v. Lippin- 367, 369 776 TABLE OF CASES. 362 441, 443, 455, 6938, 723 Montana Company v. Clark Montana paneer Co. v. Dahl 489, 491 —-, Da 489, 491 Moniatve Ml. ‘Co. v. St. Louis M. & M. Co. 740, 742 ——, St. Louis M. & M. Co. v. 728, 740, 742 Montana M. L. & M. Co., Carrhartv. | 328 Montana Ry. Co. v. Warren 188, 190 Montana Union Ry. Co., Butte, Ana- conda & Pacific R. Co. v. 592 Montana Wood Co., McDonald v. 220, 222, 277, 480, 482 Montgomery v. Wilson Creek M. & M. Co. 487, 494 Montooth v. Gamble 42, 46, 48, 129 Moody v. Alexander 134 Moore v. Brown 194 v. Ferrell 727 — v. Hamerstag 211, 344 — v. Miller 52, 58, 148 —— ». Rollins 9 — v. Smaw 178, 194 —, State v. 324 v. Wilkinson 419 More v. Massini 725 Morehead, Conrad »v. Moreland v. Frick Coke Co. Morenhaut v. Wilson 102, 158, 154 574 198, 297, 303 649 cott 190, 681 | Morgan, Butte T. M. Co. v. Miner, Abraham L. 582 | ——, Krause v. 791 — v. Marriott 407 | ——, Rockwell v. 10 Mineral Claimants, Lead City Town- Morganstern v. Thrift 758 site v. 436 | Morgenson v. Middlesex M. Co. 475 Miners’ Ditch Co., Tenny v. 666 | Moriarty, Gelcich v. 196, 280, 326 Mining Co., Capner v. 18] Moritz v. Lavelle 211 , Gaines v. 11 | Morning Star M. Co., Victor M. Co. v. 687 —— v. Leport 5, 18| Morrill v. Margaret M. Co. 200, 878, 566 » McCord »v. 745 | Morris, Brown v. 6 Minnekahta Stone Mine 201, 481 | ——, Doherty v. 275, 312, 395 Minnesota M. Co., National Copper —, Johnston v. 529 Co. v. 634|— ». W. & R. R. T. P. R. Co. 189 Mint L. & M. Site 309 Morrison, DeNoon v. 273 Mission Transfer Co., Dietz v. 124, 128,| ——, Williams v. 68 579 | Morse v. DeArdo 773 Missouri Iron Co., Haensler v. 21| Morton v. Nebraska 195, 417, 541, 564, Mitchell, Bannon v. 633 566 —— v. Brown 556 v. Solambo Copper M. Co. 211, 288 —— v. Cline 211, 260, 426 | Moses, Coal Creek M. & Mfg. Co. v. 708 —, James 222 | ——, Hungarian Hill Gravel M. Co. v. 668 ——., Palmour vz. 623 | ——, Massot v. 49 —— v. Rome 677 Mosley, William H. 557 Mix, Duffy v. 318, 331, 338 | Moss, Davis v. 107, 129, 155, 160, 588 Moingona Coal Co., Livingston v. 679 | Moss Rose Lode 875 Mongrain v. Northern Pacific R. Co. 510] Mount Auburn G. Q. M. Co., Hol- Monitor Lode 409] land v. 230 Mono, Shoo Fly v. 4 Monroe Lode 409, 492 Mont Blanc Con. Gravel M. Co. v. DeBour 393 Montague, Clifton v. 100 Montana v. Buley 531 Montana Central R. Co. v. Migeon 490 04 | Mount Diablo M. & M. Co. v. Callison 236, 267, 284, 801, 448 Mount Lookout C. Co., Shoemaker v. 122 Mount Pleasant Mine 404 Mountain Maid 435 Mountain Tiger et al. Lodes 402 Mountaineer G. M. Co., Williams v. 773 TABLE OF CASES. Moxon v. Wilkinson Moyers v. ae 114, 155 ——, Tile 121, 125, 146, 155 Meslay Valley M. & M. Co. v. Phil: 788 708 701 96, 98 172 786 278 792 595 432, 528 482, 528 378 559 292, 763 103, 139 83 276, 398, 479 Mosel M. Co. v. Watrous Muhlenberg, Dundas »v. — v. Henning Muir, Bewick v. ——,, Victor Coal Co. v. Muldoon, Pharis v. Mulhern, Lehigh Valley Coal Co. v. Mulhollan, Shoenberger v. Mullan v. United States —, United States v. Mulligan v. Hansen Mulvane, D. A. & G. W. Mulverhill, Boucher v. Munhall, Smith v. Munn ». Stone Munroe v. Armstrong 158 Munson x. Tryon 718, 782, 733 Murley v. Ennis 295, 298, 344 Murphy v. Cobb 310, 337 Murphy’s Flat F. Co., Union Water XXXVIL Nelson v. Hoch 681 v. O'Neal 611, 623 —, United States v. 602 Nelson Mining Co., Ison v. 643 Nerce Valle 547 Nesbit v. Godfrey 143 Nessler v. Bigelow 570 Nethery v. Payne 727 Nettie Lode v. Texas Lode 413 Neubaumer v. Woodman 327 Neumoyer v. Andreas 73 Nevada C. & S. C. Co. v. Kidd 652 582 414 Nevada, Keystone L. & M. Site v. Nevada Lode Nevada Reservoir Ditch v. Blue Point Placer 405 Nevada Water Co. v. Powell 651 Neville, Ferguson v. 205 New Boston C. & M. Co. v. Pottsville Water Co. 624 New Jersey Zinc & Iron Co., Lehigh Zinc & Iron Co. v. 132 New York & East Tennessee Iron Co. v. Stephens 107 New York Hill Co. v. Rocky Bar Co. 374, Co. v. 668 409 Murray, Block v. 776| New York & Last Chance M. Co., ——, Blue Bird M.Co. v. 466, 699, 742] Del Monte M. & M. Co. v. 460 —~. Butte 399, 522) New York L. & M. Claim 507 —— v. Haverty 21| New York M. Co., Bear River & Au- ——,, Hobart v. 40, 51| burn Water Co. v. 620, 646 ——, Pardee »v. 466, 476, 571 | Newark Coal Co. v. Upson 44 —, Reins v. 214, 222, 234, 479 | Newberg Oriel C. & C. Co., Graham v. 793 Murtland v. Callihan 747 | Newbill v. Thurston 230, 237 Musgrove, Rico R. & M. Co. v. 773 | Newhouse, Francoeur v. 198, 533, 570 Myers, Hukill v. 169 | Newman v. Barnes 414 — v. Spooner 253 | —-, E. S. 562 —, Hill». 644 Newport Lode 366 Nanranara M. & T. Co., Thomas v. 723, | Newton, Thompson ». 747 738 | Nichols v. Becker 279, 411 Napier v. Bulwinkle 677 | ——, Lipscomb v. 555 Nash, Nisbet v. 758 | ——, Wolverton vz. 391, 398 National Copper Co. v. Minnesota M. Nigger Hill Con. M. Co., Grosfield v. 493 Co, 634 | Nil Desperandum Placer 352, 366 National M. & E. Co. 506 | Nisbet v. Nash 758 National M. Co., Foote v. 219, 268, 466 | Noble v. Sylvester 7 National Transit Co., Enterprise O. & Nolan v. Lovelock 762 G. Co. v. 29! Noonan v. Caledonia G. M. Co. 515, 546 v. Weston 702 , Caledonia G. M. Co. v. 546 Natoma Water Co., Broder v. 661) North American M. Co., Smith v. 293 —, Hancock v. 654 | North Bloomfield Gravel M. Co., In re 619 —, Kelly z. 644 | ——, Woodruff v. 285, 616, 619 —, McCoy v. 650 | North Leadville v. Searl 376 Nebraska, Morton v. 195, 417, 541, 564, | North Noonday M. Co. v. Orient M. 566] Co. 208, 204, 216, 229, 231, 240, 244, Nebraska & C. Stone Co., Cheeney v. 693 Neel v. Neel 12, 604 .——, Pennsylvania Salt Co. v. 17, 45 Neeld’s Road 595 Nega v. Barber Asphalt Paving Co. 71 Negley, Boyd v. 596 Negus, James D. 435, 558 Neill v. Shamburg 715 268, 285, 308, 320, 449 Be Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. Snow- 19, 746 North Star M. Co., Carson City G. & S. M. Co. ». 359, 462 — v. Central Pac. R. Co. 538 ge ee C. & I. Co., Algonquin Coal 0. v. XXXVili Northern Pacific Coal Co. Northern Pacific R. Co. ——,, Barden v. 557 538 533, 584, 589 — v. Cannon 847, 425, 434, 534 —, Casey v. 539 ——, Champion Con. M.Co. v. 539 — ». Collins 535, 559 —, Dobler v. 881 — v. Lewis 604 — v. Marshall 381 ——., Mongrain v. 510 -——- v. Sanders 534 ——,, Sweeney »v. 352, 381 ——, Wilkinson v. 536 —, Winscott v. 381, 539 Northumberland County v. Zimmer- TABLE OF CASES. O’Neal, Nelson v. 611, 623 Ontario Iron Co., Gilmore v. 109 Oolagah Coal Co. v. McCaleb 723 Ophir S. M. Co. v. Carpenter 656, 657 Oram’s Estate 121 Ore Knob Copper Co., Adams v. 37, 150 Oreamuna v. Uncle Sam G. & S. M. Co. 293, 299, 305 Oregon Co., Live Yankee Co. v. 261 Oregon & California R. Co., Bybee v. 662 O’Reilly v. Campbell 204, 205 Orient M. Co., North Noonday M. Co. v. 208, 204, 216, 229, 231, 240, 244, 268, 285, 308, 320, 449 Orient, etc. Tunnel Lodes 855 Original Co. v. Winthrop M. Co. 272,290 man 3| Ormsby Coal Co., Bestwick v. 1738, 586, Northwestern C. & I. Co., Stewart v. 145, 684 588 | Oro Placer Claim 370 Northwestern Lode & Mill Site 410 | Orr v. Haskell 292 Norton, Kneeland v. 547 | Ortman ». Dixon 647, 667 — v. Snyder 84) Osage Coal M. Co., Spiva v. 790 Noteware v. Sterns 665 | Osborne, Butler Savings Bank v. 765 Noyes v. Black 829 | Oscamp v. Crystal River M. Co. 271, — , Hopkins v. 329, 345 302 v. Mantle 398, 487, 490, 525 | Osgood v. El Dorado W. & D.G.M. -——,, Mantle v. 898, 487, 490} Co. 653, 671 —, Porter v. 172 | Oskaloosa College v. Western Union Noyes Placer, Railroad Lode v. 493| Fuel Co. 125, 696 Ouimette v. O’Connor 561 Outley, Gartside v. 51 Oax Rive Co. v. Rogers 702. Ovens v. Stephens 407 O’Brien, Franklin M. Co. ». 746 | Overman v. Dardanelles 402 Occidental, Sutro Tunnel v. 496 | Overman S. M. Co. v. American M. Occidental M. & M. Co., Skyrme v. 777} Co. 258 O’Connor ». Irvine 426 | —— v. Corcoran 221, 594 —, Ouimette v. 561 | Owen, West v. 863 O’Donnell v. Brehen 40 | Owens, Pennsylvania M. Co. v. 335 v. Glenn 220, 238, 248, 250 | Owings v. Emery 16 Offerman v. Starr 44, 121, 680 Ogden v. Hatry 163 Ogle, Illinois Coal Co. v. 696 | Pacz, McNeil v. 279, 315 O’Gorman v. Mayfield 560 | Pacific Coast M. & M. Co. »v. Spargo 422 O’Hara, Smith v. 652 | Pacific G. & S. M. Co., Pralus v. 297, 308, O’Hern, Watson v. 102, 108 336 Oil Creek & Allegheny R. Co., Has- Pacific Slope Lode 481, 525 son v. 586 | Page, A. B. 507, 606 Oil Well Supply Co., Aderhold v. 140 v. Parker 713 O’Keiffe v. Cunningham 609 v. Summers 309 Olathe Placer 369, 481, 492 | Pagosa Springs 566 Olathe Placer Mine 493 | Paire v. Markham 560 Old Missouri, Horrid v. 359, 402 | Palmer v. Truby 158, 161, 702 Old Telegraph M. Co. v. Central v. Uncas M. Co. 772 Smelting Co. 786 | Palmour v. Mitchell 623 —, Kahn v. 238, 429, 469, 736, 747 | Pancoast Coal Co., Winton Coal Co. v. 29 Older, Vervalen v. 18 | Pardee, Hill v. 685 Oliver, Chicago Quartz M. Co. v. 536 v. Murray 466, 476, 571 ——, Gibson v. 165 | Park Co. v. Cummings 145, 586 v. Goetz 152 | Parke v. Kilham 645, 662 —, Leatherman v. 164 | Parker, Chamberlain v. 110 Omaha & Grant S. & R. Co. v. Tabor 20, |——, Hand Gold M. Co. »v. 660 69, 695, 746 | ——, Page v. 718 Omaha Quartz Lode 404 | —— v. Parker 365, Omar v. Soper 225, 299, $12, 339, 344 731, 738 Parker’s Adm’rs, Barksdale »v. 50 TABLE OF CASES. Parks v. Hendsch 201 —, Manville v. 759, 760 ——,, People v. 633 ——, Prosser v. 262, 288 , Redfield v. 571, 572 Parks Canal & M. Co. v. Hoyt 653 Parley’s Park S. M. Co. v. Kerr 257, 286 Parole, Ground Hog Lode v. 412 Parrott, United States v. 720 Parsons v. Ellis 368, 414 Partridge v. McKinney 296, 670 Patchen v. Keeley 330, 699 Patchin, Hunt v. 210, 391, 409, 570 Patrick v. Bowman 707 ——, Bowman v. 707 —, Rhoades »v. 6 v. Weston 751, 760 Patten Extension Lode 471, 472, 476 Patterson v. Hitchcock 224, 463 —— v. Keystone M. Co. 342 —— v. Tarbell 226 Patton v. Axley 52 Payne, Nethery v. 727 Pearce, Desloge v. 58, 70 Peard, Trevaskis v. 278, 298 Pearne v. Coal Creek Coal Co. 135, 589 Pearsall & Freeman 261, 355, 481 Pederson Lode v. Black Hawk Town- _ site 3875, Peel Splint Coal Co., State v. Peeples, Leonard v. Peers v. Consolidated Coal Co. of St. Louis 187 ——. Consolidated Coal Co. of St. Louis v. 38, 119, 137 Peirano v. Pendola - 379 Pelican & Dives M. Co. v. Snodgrass 219, 274, 311 Pell, Corning Tunnel Co. v. 498, 500, 501, 503 Pelton v. Minah Con. M. Co. 776 Pemberton, Caruthers v. 655 Pendery, Crossman v. 217, 321 Pendill v. Eells 146 Pendola, Peirano v. 379 Penn v. Taylor 678 Penn Gas Coal Co. v. Versailles Fuel Gas Co. 191, 684 Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. Sanderson 625, 628, 629, 686 182 336 — v. Winchester Pennsylvania M. Co. v. Owens Pennsylvania Salt Co. v. Neel 17, 45 People, Braceville Coal Co. v. 768 — v. District Court 397, 593 v, Eldredge 190 ——, Frorer v. 767 —— v. Gold Run D. & M. Co. 621 ——, Harding v. 768 ——, Jones v. 767 ——, Loose »v. 781 ——, Millett v. 767 —— v. Parks 633 ——, Ramsey v. 767 XXX1LX People, Reinecke v. 767 —, Sholl v. 781 v, Williams 5 People ex rel. Wolpert v. Rogers 622 People’s Gas Co. v. Tyner 31 People’s Nat. Gas Co. Mathews v. 166 Pepper, Hawkins v. 154 Perasich, Slavonian M. Co. v. 268, 309 Perego v. Dodge 885, 393 Pereira v. Jacks 582 Periepi v. Frankenfield 779 Perkins, Hodgson v. 73, 177 — v. Rice 711 Pershbaker, Gregory v. 214,218, 238, 241, 478, 500 Persons, Linton C. & M. Co. v. 789 Peru Iron Co., Livingston v. 718 Peru L. & M. Site 508 Peters, Cummings v. 663 —— v. Philipps 106, 580 Peterson, Adolph 557 —, Atchison v. 615, 642, 721 —, Brown v. 596 —, Chicago, Wilmington, & V. C. Co. v. 788 —, Kier v. 17, 32, 1383 Petit v. Buffalo Co. 410 Petroleum Co. v. Coal, Coke & uwlfg. Co. 108, 148, 167 —, Gale »v. 78 v. Transportation Co. 135 Pettibone v. Smith 117 Pettingill, Smith v. 786 Pew, Cochran v. 98, 166 Pfeiffer v. Brown 628 Pharis v. Muldoon 273 Phelps v. Chesson 160 Philadelphia Co., McMillan v. 166 Philadelphia & Reading Coal Co. »v. Taylor 636 Philipps, Peters v. 106, 580 Phillips, Bartley v. 166, 176 v. Coast 702 — , Irwin v. 644 —, Muddy Valley M.& M.Co.v. 788 ——,, Scranton v. 42, 681 v. Vandergrift 164 v. Watson 593 Phillpotts v. Blasdel 238, 346 Phenix Water Co. v. Fletcher 649 Pierce, Sparks v. 322, 423, 517 —, Stinchfield v. 381 v. Tidwell 123 —, Youghiogheny River Coal Co. v. 73 Pierson, McFeters v. 528, 604, 695 Pike, MceTarnahan v. 571 Pike’s Peak Lode 431, 436, 484, 493 Piru Oil Co. 544 Platt, Farnum v. 83, 84, 585 Plested, Van Doren v. 201, 482 Plevna Lode 857, 471 iowman, Ralston v. 291, 610 Plum, Gaston v. 56 ——, Hart v. 341 xl Plummer »v. Hillside C. & I. Co. 48, 77, 175, 574 Plymouth Lode 436, 524 Plymouth Co. v. Kommiskey 769 Pocotillo S. M. Co., Brandow v. 345 Poire v. Wells 261, 426, 521 Polk’s Lessee v. Wendell 421 Pollard v. Shively 231, 242, 246, 310 Pomeroy v. Salt Co. 586 Pomeroy Coal Co., Williams x. 635, 700 Pond M. Co., Real Del Monte M. Co. v. 725 Poplar Creek Con. Quartz Mine 222 Porter, Friend v. 185 v. Noyes 172 Poterie v. Poterie Gas Co. 165, 735 Poterie Gas Co. v. Poterie 165, 785 Potosi Co., Blodgett v. 343 Potter, Etting v. 381 Potts, Garman »v. 97 Pottsville Water Co., New Boston C. & M. Co. v. 624 Poujade v. Ryan 289, 242, 294 Powell v. Bourroughs 109 — v. Ferguson 414 v. Lantzy 49 , Nevada Water Co. v. 651 Pralus v. Jefferson G. & S. M. Co. 289, 826 v. Pacific G. & S. M. Co. 297, 308, 336 Pratt v. Avery 366 Prescott, Metcalf v. 245, 248, 251 Preston, Bracken v. 787 —— v. Hunter 241, 251 Prevost v. Gorrell 632 Price, Johnston v. 747 , Wyoming Coal & Transportation a 182 Co. v. Pride of the West Mine 405 Priddy v. Griffith 9 Primeaux, Abbott v. 338 Prince of Wales 862, 369, 373 Princeton M. Co. v. First National Bank 207 Pringle ». Vesta Coal Co. 685 Proctor v. Jennings 657 Proprietors of Ore Bed, Bushnell v. 622 Prospect M. Co., Jones v. 443, 468 Prosser v. Parks 262, 288 Protector Lode 436, 525 Providence Trustees, gg of i7 Pugh, Becker v. 2, 268, 290, 804 Puryear, Crouch v. 15 Putnam, Green v. §80 ——., Settembre v. 756 Quarry Co., Trust Co. v. 18, 778 Quartette M. Co., Kannaugh v. 596 Quicksilver M. Co., Santa, Clara M. Assn. v. 422, 754 Quigley v. Gillett 278, 394 Quimby v. Boyd 246, 274 Quinn v. Quinn 758 Quirk v. Falk 343 TABLE OF CASES. Rasuin, William 481 Rader zv. Allen 572 Radford Iron Co., Cowan v. 50, 176 Raff, Illinois 8S. M. & M. Co. v. 469 Railroad Lode v. Noyes Placer 493 Rainey v. Fricke Coke Co. 20 Ralston v. Plowman 291, 610 Ramelli v. Irish 655 Ramsay v. Chandler 643 Ramsey v. People 767 Randall v. Merideth 765 —, Saterfield v. 571 Randlett, King v. 842 Randolph v. Halden 113 Rankin’s Appeal 47, 586 Rankin, Campbell v. 240, 284, 320, 321 —, James D. 2, 524 —, Silva v. 728 Rara Avis G. & S. M. Co.v. Bouscher 773 Ratcliff, McKnight v. Raunheim v. Dahl 635 398, 488, 491 —, Dahil v. 398, 424, 488, 491 Ray, Broad v. 560 v. Hodge 107 — v. West Pennsylvania N.G.Co. 162, 163, 164, 165 Raynolds v. Hanna 11 Rea v. Stephenson 544 Reach, Meistrell v. 776 Reading & Pottsville R. Co. v. Ha thasar Real Del Monte M. Co. v. Pond M. Co. 15 Rebel Lode 484 Red Cloud Con. M. Co., Tredinnick v. 772 Red Pine Mine 294 Redfield v. Parks 571, 572 Redstone Co. v. Roby 791 Reed’s Appeal 778 Reed v. Beck 107, 120 —, Hail v. 81 —, Meagher v. 760 — v. Reed 11 v. Spicer 668, 745 ——,, United States v. 541 Reeding, Hirbour v. 212, 345 Rehm, Bradstreet v. 363 Reinecke v. People 767 Reininghaus, Cutting v. 378 Reins v. Murray 214, 222, 234, 479 Reliance Coal Co. v. Kentucky ‘Coal Co. 590 Remington v. Baudit 276 Rend v. Venture Oil Co. 723 Rendall, Evans vw. 404 Renshaw v. Switzer 338 Republic Iron Works v. Burgwin 587 Rerick v. Kern 80 Resumption M. & S. Co., Gardner v. 772 Reymert, West Point Iron Co. v. 731 Reynolds, Commonwealth v. 783 — v. Cook 66 — vu. Hosmer 663 —— v. Iron Silver M. Co. 821, 388, 488, 485 TABLE OF CASES. Reynolds, Iron Silver M. Co. v. —, Turner »v. 486 583 Rhea v. Tathem 764 —— v. Vannoy 764 Rhoades v. Patrick 6 Rhodes v. Treas 381 Rice, J. B 361 711 790 ~——, Perkins »v. Rich Hill Coal M. Co., Fell v. —, Leslie v. 790 Richard v Wolfling 2738, 543 Richards v. 4 ES 298, 519, oa, 726 ——,, Dow 519, 520 —, Tidle Schuylkill N. R. & C. Co. v. 625 Richardson v. Kier 666 v. McNulty 297, 836, 342 —, Smith v. 736 Richmond, Commonwealth v. 783 Richmond Iron Works, Arnold v. 697 Richmond M. Co., Eureka Con. M. Co. v. 417, 438, 445, 448, 450, v. Rose 257, 258, 890, 400, — , Rose v. 314, 390, ——, United States x. Rickard, Jennings v. Rico Aspen Con. M. Co., Enterprise M. Co. v. 897, 495, 497 Rico Lode 370 478 497 400 603 709 xli Rockafellow v. Hanover Coal Co, 583, 588 Rockwell v. Graham 394, 665 v. Morgan 10 Rocky Bar Co., New York Hill Co. v. 874, 409 Rocky Branch C. Co., Beatie v. 94 Rocky Lode 375 Rodgers, Lincoln v. 611 Rogers v. Cooney 233, 321, 330, 61L —, Downey v. 407 ——, Oak Ridge Co. v. 702 —, People ex rel. Wolpert v. 622 —, Samuel E. 261, 360 —— v. Soggs 196, 599 Rollins, Lockhart v. 212, 276 ——, Moore v. 9 Rome, Mitchell v. 677 —, Smith v. 184, 727 Roosevelt v. Dale 713 —, Dale »v. 718 Rorer Iron Co. v. Trout 715 Rose v. Richmond M. Co. ——, Richmond M. Co. v. Rose Lode Claims Rosenthal v. Ives 291, 397, 479 Rosenzweig, Duffield v. 82, 702 Roseville Alta M. Co. v. Iowa Gulch Co. 845 314, 390, 400 257, 258, 890, 400, 497 241, 356, 363 Rico R. & M. Co. v. Musgrave 773 | Ross, Derry v. 299, 726 Rico Townsite 524 | —— v. Heathcock 127 Riddle v. Mellon 143, 173 | ——, Jerome v. 723, 730, 736 Ridelsperger, Cryan v. 158 | —— v. Scott 703, 704 Ridge Co., Antoine Co. v. 336 | Rounsley v. Jones 126 Ridgely v. Conewago Iron Co. 89, 91} Rowan v. Satterfield 623 Righter v. Hamilton 18 | Rowen, Caledonia M. Co. v. 377 Ripley, Rutland Marble Co. v. 55, 66 | Rowena Lode 366 Risher, Hays v. 5, 598 | Royal K. Placer 214 Ritchie v. McAllister 130 | Roydor, Robinson v. 406, 492 Ritter, Clark v. 768 | Rucker, Aspen M. & S. Co. v. 748 Rivers v. Burbank 665 | —— v. Knisley 379 Rizor, Hindman v. 667 | Ruiz, Horsewell v. 827, 463 Roach, Bartlett C. & I. Co. v. 787 | Rumsey, United States v. 354, 436 v. Gray 287 | Runk, Foster v. 86 Robbins, Tipping v. 30, 74, 141 | Rupley v. Welch 196, 649 Roberts, Cooper v. 527| Rush v. French 210, 286, 302, 324, 334, ——., Honor v. T9L 340 —— v. Jepson 377 | Russell, Balfour v. 144 —, Lakin »v. 257, 425 | —— v. Chumasero 247 —, McCharles v. 382 | ——, Comegys v. 140 —- v. Wilson 294, 330 | ——, Commonwealth v. 613, 629 Robertson, Hargrove v. 510 , Gonu v. i 276, 313 ——, Jones v. 633, 695 | Rutland Marble Co. v. Ripley 55, 66 — v. Smith 189, 292, 328 | Ryan, Harvey v. 237, 289 --—— v, Youghiogheny R. C. Co. 685 | ——, Poujade v. 239, 242° 294 Robinson v. Coal Co. 621 | ——, Strang v. 308, 309 , Fritzler v. 92 | Ryckman ». Gillis 60, 688 ——, Johnstone v. 209 | Rynd v. Rynd Farm Oil Co. 81, 156 -——, Lawrence v. 759 v. Mayger 406 —— v. Roydor 406, 492 | Santry v. Berwind-White C. M.Co. 770 —— v. Troup M. Co. 72 | Salt Bluff Placer 566 Roby, Jackson v. 269, 389 | Salt Co. v. Brown 598 —,, Redstone Co. v. 791 | ——, Pomeroy v. 586 xlii Seven Thirty Lode 372 TABLE OF CASES. Sanders, Northern Pacific R. Co. v. 584] Sever v. Gregovich 207, 314 —— v. Sharp 165 | Severance, Whiteman v. 194 Sanderson, Delaware, Lackawanna & Seymour, Bowyer v. 168 Western R. Co. v. 46, 116 | —— v. Fisher 232, 258, 396, 427 —, Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. 625, 628, v. Wood 297 629, 686 | Shater v. Constans 3898 — v. Scranton 42, 45, 46, 77, 115| Shainline’s Appeal 779 Sandoval C. & M. Co., Ewing v. 579 | Shamburg, Neill v. 7165 San Felipe M. Co. v. Belshaw 343 | Shannon, Michael 563 San Francisco, Trenouth v. 321 | Sharpe, Sanders v. 165 ‘Sangamon C. M. Co. v. Wiggerhaus 782] Shaw v. Wallace 16, 40, 52, a Sanger, Doe v. 463 | Sheafer, First National Bank v. San Juan S. M. Co., Kendall v. 545 | ——, Hecksher v. 116, ace Santa Clara M. Ass’n v. Quicksilver Sheaffer v. Sheaffer 160 M. Co. 422, 754 | Sheets v. Allen 52 Saterfield v. Randall 571 | Sheffield & B. C. I. & R. Co., Central Satisfaction Extension Mill Site 509] Trust Co. v. 771 Satterfield v. Rowan 623 | Sheldon v. Davey 144 Saunders v. Mackey 304, 313 | ——, Scott v. 559 | Savage v. Boynton 879 | Shellar v. Shivers 130 Savage C. S. M. Co., Hunter v. 777 | Shenango N. G. Co., Citizens’ N. G. Savage M. Co., Thornburgh v. 740) Co. v. 7384 Savage Silver M. Co., Chase v. 212 | Shepherd v. Bird 201 Savery, Milligan v. 329, 398 | —— v. McCalmont Oil Co. 32, 79, 152 Sawyer, Turner v. 271, 392, 409, 425] Sherer, George H. 564 Sayers vr. Hoskinson 13| Sherman M. Co, Smith v. 776 Schaefer, Consolidated Coal Co. v. 118,| Shively, Pollard ». 231, 242, 246, 310 142 | Shivers, Shellar v. 1380 Schaupp v. Hukill 168 | Shoemaker’s Appeal 18 Scheller, Consolidated Coal Co. of St. Shoemaker v. Hatch 665 Louis v. 788 v. Mount Lookout Coal Co. 122 Scheurman, Giroux v. 414 | —— v. United States 179 Schmisseur, Consolidated Coal Co. of Shoenberger v. Lyon 85 St. Louis wu v. Mulhollan 595 Schmoele, Schuylkill & Dauphin Imp. Sholl v. German Coal Co. 145, 585, 593 & R. Co. v. 147 u. People 781 Schultz v. Bower 687 | Shonbar Lode 259 Schuylkill & Dauphin Imp. & R. Co. Shoo Fly v. Mono 404 v. Schmoele 147 | Short, Williams v. 140 Scott, Kemble C. & I. Co. ». 96, 98] Shortt, Heintz v. 164 — v. Maloney 414 | Shreeve, Cheesman v. 217, 809 ——, Ross v. 708, 704 | Shreve, Cheesman v. 455, 693 — v. Sheldon 559 | —— v. Copper Bell M. Co. 220, 232, 345 ——, Waterhouse v. 412] Shull v. Fontanet M. Co 774 Scranton v. Gilbert 116 | Shurtz, United States v. 375 v, Phillips 42, 681 | Sides Silver M. Co., Harvey v. 611 —, Sanderson v. 42, 45, 46, 77, 115} Sierra Buttes G. M. Co., Lakin v. 271, Seager v. McCabe 10 302, 309 Seals, Fremont v. 570 | Sierra Grande M. Co. v. Crawford 508 Searl, North Leadville v. 376 | Sierra Nevada Con. M. Co., Back v. 397, Searle v. Lackawanna & Bloomsbury 499, 501 Co. 190, 191 | ——, Gilpin v. 465, 728 Searle Placer 361, 381, 481 | Sigafus, Solitaire Co. v. 411 Sears, Becker v. 406, 492 | Sillingford v. Good 121 —,J. P. 279, 351 | Silsby v. Trotter 58, 60, 581 Seaton M. Co. v. Davis 369 | Silva v. Rankin 728 Seawell, Dayton G.& S.M.Co.v. 593,|-——, Southern Development Co. v. 706 504 Silver Cliff v. Colorado 531 Seidler v. Lafave 249 | Silver Jennie Lode 863 Senator Mill Site 356 | Silver King Lode 413 Settembre v. Putnam 756 | Silver King M. Co. 863 Settle, Kramer v. 212, 242, 254, 275, | Silver King Quartz Mine 367 304 | Silver M. Co. v. Fall 742 Silver Queen Lode 472 TABLE OF CASES. Silvester v. Coe Quartz M. Co. 773 —, Wilhelm v. 472, 474 Simmons, W. A. 375, 524 ——, Wimer v. 658, 669, 671 Simms, McDowell v. 714 Simoson, Waddell v. 791 Simpson, Anderson v. 70 —, Coker v. 645, 725 —, Eddy »v. 644, 670 Sims v. Smith 645 Skeldon, Beard v. 787 Skillicorn, Bell v. 468 Skillman, Lachman 754, 755 Skyrme v. Occidental M.& M. Co. 777 Slater v. Haas 760 Slauson, Byrne »v. 234, 368, 414 Slavonian M. Co. v. Perasich 268, 3809 Slide Lode, Corning Tunnel v. 370 Sloan v. Furnace Co. 44, 85 Smallhouse v. Kentucky & Montana G. & S. M. Co. 175 Smaw, Moore v. 178, 194 Smelting Co., Steel v. 421, 423, 514, oy 5. Smick, Kenrick v. 160, 161 874 Snell v. Wasatch & Jordan Valley R. Cc 0. 583, 591 Snoddy v. Bolen 84, 185 Snodgrass, Pelican & Dives M. Co.v. 219, 274, 811 Snow Flake Lode 360, 430 Snowden, North Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. 19, 746 Snyder v. Burnham 762 , Norton v. 84 Sobey v. Thomas 127 Soggs, Rogers r. 196, 577 Sohn, Warren v. 174 Solambo Copper M. Co., Morton v. 211, 288 Solary, Brown v. 727 Sold Again Fraction M. Lode 875 Solitaire Co. v. Sigafus All Solliday v. Johnson 182 Soper, Omar v. Souter v. Maguire 225, 299, 312, 339, 344 231, 242° 304, 310 South Carolina, Coosaw M. Co. v. —180, 723 South Dakota, Johnson »v. 560 —— v. Vermont Stone Co. 201, 532 Smith, A. P. South End M. Co. v. Tinney 314, 428, 572 —, Avery v. 563 | South Pennsylvania Oil Co., Fleming —— v. Buckley 559 F . Co. v. 112 ——. Burdge v. 529 | South Spring Hill G. M. Co., Amador —, Conant v. 29| Medean G. M. Co. v. 455, 542 uv. Cooley 56, 749, 758 | South Star Lode 484, 494 —- v. Doe 196, 198, 335 | South West Pennsylvania Pipe Lines, ——, Findlay »v. 15, 605} Giffin v. ' 703 — ., George H. 409 | Southern Cross G. & S. M. Co. v. Eu- —, Golden Terra M. Co. v. 219, 546] ropa M. Co. 221, 288, 249 — v. Halloway 186 | Southern Development Co. v. Silva 706 —, Hartman »v. 505 | Southern Nevada G. & S. M. Co., —— v. Hill 521] Hamilton v. 822, 391, 424, 590 —, Hill v. 621, 650 | Southern Pacific R. Co. v. Allen G. ——, Hoy v. 700) M. Co. 538 — , Kitchen v. 76, 133 | —— v. Griffin 876, 540 —, Lewis 606 | ——, Walker v. 630 —, McKinney v. 649 | Southmayd v. Southmayd 845, 763 —— v. Munhall 103, 189 | Southwestern Mining Co. 567 —— v. North American M. Co. 293 | Spargo, Pacific Coast M. & M. Co. v. 422 — v. O’Hara 652 | Sparks’ v. Pierce 822, 423, 517 —, Pettibone v. 117 | Sparrow v. Strong 281, 319 —— v. Pettingill 736 | Speake v. Hamilton 658 — v. Richardson 736 | Spencer, Copper Hill Co. v. 342 ——., Robertson v. 189, 292, 328 | —— v. Kunkle 125 —— v. Rome 184, 727 | —— v. Winselman 337 —— v. Sherman M. Co. 776 | Spicer, Reed v. 668, 745 —, Sims v. 645 | Spilman, Brown v. 81, 79 v. State 770 | Spiva v. Osage Coal M. Co. 790 ——, Taylor v. 779 | Spokane H. M. Co., Hawkins v. 761 ——, United States v. 603 | Spong, Samuel W. 480, 537 ——, Wheeler v. 199, 202, 357, 418, 480, | Spooner, Myers v. 253 580 | Sprague v. Locke 726 — , Wilson v. 604 | Spratt v. Edwards 544 —, Wimer v. 714| Spray, Thompson v. 208, 211, 237, 241, Smoke House Lode 435 254, 258 Smuggler M. Co. v. Trueworthy Lode Claim 414 Snell v. Levitt 323 Spring, Eclipse G. & S. M. Co. v. 398, 463 Spring Creek W. & M. Co., Tartar v. 196, 599, 644 xliv Spring Valley M. & I. Co., Farley v. 664 —., Hendricks v. 686, 694 Springer v. Citizens’ N. G. Co. 98, 163 Springfield Foundry & Machine Co. v. Cole 72, 775 Springside Coal M. Co. v. Grogan a Spur Lode 222, 363 Spurr, Williams v. 712 Stafford, E. R. 559 Stahl, Lee v. 394, 475, 476 Stambaugh, Tod v. 95 St. Anthony Falls W. P. Co. v. King Bridge Co. 185 Stark, Strepey v. 252, 328, 337 Starr, Offerman v. 44, 121, 680 —, Thomas 435 State v. Black River Phosphate Co. 181 —— v. Burt 6 ——, Castleberry v. 660 —— v. Fire Creek C. & C. Co. 770 — v. Goodwill 770 —— v. Guano Co. 182, 708 —, Hamilton v. 781 —— v. Jenkins 770 —- v. Loomis 768 ——, Martin v. 768 — v. Moore 324 —— v. Peel Splint Coal Co. 771 —, Smith v. 770 State Line & Sullivan R. Co., Mer- cur v. State National Bank v. Butler Steamboat Lode Steel, Caples v. —— v. Gold Lead G. & S. M. Co. 29 761 375 714 305, 401 ——v. Smelting Co. 421, 428, 514, 519, . 534 Steele, Charles W. 366 —— v. Mills 120 Steese, Hunt v. 536, 726 Steimling, Commonwealth v. 7, 612, 702 Steiner v. Marks 167 Stephan, Kline v. 431 Stephens, New York & East Tenn. I. Co. v. 107 —-, Ovens v. 407 Stephenson, Hamburg M. Co. v. 506 —, Reav. 544 v. Wilson 574, 575 Sterns, Noteware v. 665 Sterrett, Funk v. 826, 337 Stevens, Arnold v. 571 — v. Williams 445, 450 Stevenson, Acheson v. 33, 785 v, Wallace 677 ——, Waters v. 187, 699 Steves v. Carson 892 Stewart, Babcock v. 764 —, Leggatt v. 258 —— v. Northwestern n C. & I. Co. 145, 588 365 , Tomay v. Stinchfield v. Gillis 474 TABLE OF CASES. Stinchfield v. Pierce 381 St. John v. Kidd 808, 342 St. Lawrence M. Co. v. Albion Con. M. Co. 355, 409 St. Louis Independent W. Co.,Wolfv. 666 St. Louis M. & M. Co. v. Montana M. Co. 728, 740, 742 —, Montana M. Co. v. 740, 742 St. Louis Smelting & Refining Co. v. Kemp 260, 261, 268, 359, 360, 418, 42], 483, 478, 543 Stoakes v. Barrett 196 Stockbridge Iron Co. v. Cone Iron Works 698. 741 v. Hudson Iron Co. 57, 59, 84 Stokely v. Bridge Co. 187 Stone v. Bumpus 652 — v. Geyser Quicksilver M. Co. 297 ——, Hoffman »v. 645, 670 — ., MeNish v. 175 ——, Munnv. 83 , United States v. 432 Storey, Tam v. 413 Storey County, Hale & Norcross G. & S. M. Co. v. 329 Stork & Heron Placer 352 Story, Tam »v. 222 Stotenburg, Freer v. 16 Stoughton’s Appeal 32, 76 Stoutenburgh, Wharton v. 95 Stover, Boone v. 58 Stranahan, Table Mountain Tunnel Co. v. 262, 288, 289, 321, 341 Strang v. Ryan 308, 309 Stratton v. Lyon 4 Street, Hall v. 374, 408 Strehlow, Manning v. 395. Strepey v. Stark 252, 328, 337 Strettell v. Ballou 748 Strong, Heil v. 17 ——,, Jones v. 13 ——, Sparrow ». 281, 319 Strout, Capron v. 778 Stuart v. Adams 758 Sturtevant’s Appeal 141 Suessenbach v. First National Bank 345, 397, 521 Suffern v. Butler 40 Sullivan, Bush vz. 69 v. Hense 290, 327 v. Iron Silver M. Co. 485, 490 ——,, Iron Silver M. Co. v. 485 Summers, Page »v. 809 Sunday Lake M. Co. v. Wakefield 170: —, Wakefield v. 151 Superior Court, Eureka Lake & Yuba Canal Co. v. 726 ——. Golden Gate M. Co. v. 726 Susquehanna Coal Co., Lineoskiv. 791 Sutro Tunnel Co. 279, 496 Sutro Tunnel v. Occidental 496. Sutton, McCormick v. 521 Swaim v. Craven 412 Swain v. Kearney 561 Swan River M. Co., Fuller v. 610, 655, | Thomas v. Hukil? 169, 734 726|——, King v. 522, 571 Sweeney, Fort Scott C.& M.Co.v. 93)——v. NantahalaM. & T.Co. 728, 738 ——, Freezer v. 199, 859, 480 | ——, Sobey »v. 127 —— v, Northern Pacific R. Co. 352, 381 v. Thomasson 380 —, Thorne v. 729| Thomas Iron Co. v. Allentown M. -—, Tyler M. Co. v. 457| Co. 634, 700, 743 — ». Wilson 316, 375 | Thomas Pressed Brick Co. v. Herter 696 Sweet v. Webber 232, 274, 290, 327 | Thomasson, Thomas v. 380 Swift, Bretell v. 364, 3 367, 368 Thompson’s Appeal 81 Switzer, Renshaw v. 338 | Thompson, Buhl v. 173 Sylvester v. Hall 92 | ——, Carter v. 519 —, Noble v. 7|—— v. Christie 161 Syndicate Lode Mill Site 508 | ——, Craig v. 219, 246, 258, 311 — v. Jacobs 278. —, Jeremy v. 567 Table Mountain Tunnel Co. v. Stran- ——, Kistler v. 685. ahan 262, 288, 289, 321, 341 | —— v. Lee 646 Tabor v. Big Pittsburg Con. S. M. —, McLaughlin v. 219: Co. 693 | —— v. Newton 747 — v. Dexter 445 |—— v. Spray 208, 211, 237, 241, 254, 258 —, Omaha & Grant S.& R. Co. v. 20, | Thornburgh v. Savage M. Co. 740 69, 695, 746 | Thorne, Blake »v. 38 —, Wight »v. 217, 221, 373, 408 | —— v. Sweeney 729 Talbott v. King 872, 898, 428, 521, 522 | Thornton, Willis W. 563. Tam v. Storey 413 | Thrift, Morganstern v. 758. v. Story 222 | Thurston, Newbill v. 230, 237 Tanne Little Schuylkill N. R. & Tibbals, Watts v. 6 C. Co. 680 | Tibbitts v. Ah Tong 206. ‘Taniet eu v. Aurora Hill M. Co. 370 | Tidwell, Pierce v. 123 Tanner, Karns v. 156 | Tielke, Barkley v. 669, 671 Tarbell, Patterson v. 226 | Tilden v. Intervenor M. Co. 365. Tarbet, Flagstaff Silver M. Co. v. 443, | Tiley v. Moyers 121, 125, 146, 155: 454, 692 | ——, Moyers v. 114, 15& Tartar v. Spring Creek W. & M. Co. 196,| Timlin v. Brown 89, 90, 98, 99, 114 599, 644 | Tinkham v. McCaffrey 878, 544 Tathem, Rhea v. 764| Tinney, South End M.Co.v. = 814, 428, Taylor, Billings v. 9 572: —— v. Castle 757 | Tipping v. Robbins 30, 74, 141 —, Clark v. 352 | Titcomb v. Kirk 663 —, Hill v. 787 | Tod v. Stambaugh ve —, Kelly 237 | Todd, Gary v. 200, 545. —, Litchfield Coal Co. v. 787 | ——, Maxwell v. 102, 154 — v. Middleton 231 | Todd’s Valley Water Co., White v. 646 —-, Miller v. 225, 337 | Toledo Coal Co., Williams v. 778 —, Penn »v. 678 | Tomay v. Stewart 365 ——, Philadelphia & Reading Coal Tombstone M. Co, v. Way Up M. Co. 462 Co. v 636 | Tombstone Townsite Cases 252, 520 —— v. Smith 779 | Tome, Cross v. 120 ——, Union Mining Co. v. 3338, 339, 340, | Tompkins, Commonwealth v. 782. 570 | ——, McGillicuddy »v. 559 Tennessee Coal & Iron Co. v. Hamil- Topsey Mine 380- ton 620 | Torrence, Brown v. 577, 5838, 625, 681 Tennessee Lode 366 | Tousley v. Galena M. & S. Co. 185 Tenny v. Miners’ Ditch Co. 666 | Townsite of Deadwood 200: Terrible v. Gunboat 208 | Toy Long, Chapman v. 820, 721 Terrible M. Co., Argentine M. Co. v. 455] Transportation Co., Petroleum Co.v. 135. Territory v. Lee 206 | Treas, Rhodes v. 381 Terry, Conner v. 558, 559 | Tredinnick v. Red Cloud Con. M. Co. 772° Tesh, Lee Doon v. 205, 393 | Treganza, Gillett v. 66 Texas Lode, Nettie Lode v. 413 | Trenouth v. San Francisco 321 Thomas v. Chisholm 203, 206, 396 | Trevaski v. Peard 273, 298 ——, Harvey »v. 594, 595 | Trevillion, Bay State G.M.Co.v. 411,508 ——, Honeyman v. 778! Trickey Placer 361. TABLE OF CASES. xlv xlvi Trinidad C. & C. Co., United States v. 434, Trinity Church, Mather v. Trotter, Maganese Co. v. 59, —, Silsby v. 58, 60, Troup M. Co., Robinson v. Trout v. McDonald 114, 678, —, Rorer Iron Co. v. Truby, Gray v. — v. Palmer ——, Palmer v. 161, Trueman, Keeler v. 828, Trueworthy Lode Claim, Smuggler M. Co. v. Trust Co. v. Quarry Co. 18, Tryon, Munson v. 718, 732, Tuck v. Downing Tucker, Columbus & Hocking C. & I. Co. v. — v. Florida Ry. & Nav. Co. —— v. Masser 260, 359, —, Walker v. 91, 106, 146, Tulare O. & M. Co., Buena Vista Pe- troleum Co. v. Tunstall v. Christian Tuolumne County W. Co., Hoffman v. Turck, Colorado Central Con. M. 0. v. 456, 461, Turley, Granby M. & S. Co. v. Turner v. Reynolds Sawyer 271, 392, 409, Twin Lakes H. G. M.S. v. Colorado M. R. Co. Two Sisters Lode & Mill Site Tyler, Doe v. 231, Tyler M. Co. v. Last Chance M. Co. —, Last Chance M. Co. v. 426, 457, —— v. Sweeney Tyner, People’s Gas Co. v. Tyson, Gibson v. —, Harris v. —="U.. U. R. & G. Gravel Co., Watson v. Uhlig v. Garrison Ulmer v. Farnsworth Uncas M. Co., Palmer v. Uncle Sam G. & S. M. Co., Mallett ». 292, 298, 299, 304, 305, 329, —— Oreamuna v. 293, 299, Underwood, Burdge v. 196, 662, Union Coal Co. — v. La Salle Union Company’s Mine Union H. & I. Co., Double v. Union Imp. Co. & J. T. Co., Williams v. ° Union M. Co. v. Taylor 383, 889, 340, Union Oil Co. 222, Union Pacific R. Co. v. Crismon Union Petroleum Co. v. Bliven Petro- leum Co. Union Water Co. v. Crary 650, 554 701 581 581 72 681 715 218 158 702 396 414 178 733 710 624 540 478 579 528 677 666 694 7715 583 425 189 507 258 461 460 457 31 133 714 21 546 634 772 763 805 663 559 184 360 144 6 570 482 637 , 82 668 7 | Varnes, McCormick v. TABLE OF CASES. Union Water Co. v. Murphy’s Flat F. Co. 668 United Pipe Lines, Hughes v. 32, 700 United States v. Benjamin 603, 606 —— v. Carpenter 545 ——, Colorado C. & I. Co. v. 542, 554 v. Culver 542 —- v. Eaton 600 ——, Germania Iron Co. v. 434 —— v. Iron Silver M. Co. 350, 482, 478, 487 —— »v. King 434 v. Marshall S. M. Co. 483 —, McLaughlin »v. 533 — v. Mullan 432, 528 —, Mullan v. 432, 528 —— v. Nelson 602 —— v. Parrott 720 v. Reed 641 zy. Richmond M. Co. 603 —— v. Rumsey 354, 436 — v. Schurtz 375 ——., Shoemaker v. 179 — v. Smith 603 — v. Stone 432 v. Trinidad C. & C. Co. 434, 554 —, Western Pacific R. Co. v. 534 — v. Williams 604 United States Petroleum Co., Chicago & Allegheny O. & M. Co. v. 75, 76, ee 738 Upson, Newark Coal Co. v. 44 Upton v. Brazier 70 —, Larkin v. 217, 220, 456 Urton, Fitzgerald v. 196 Utah M. & M. Co. v. Dickert & Myers Sulphur Co. 278, 300 Utah-Wyoming Imp. Co., Kerr v. 556 VALENTINE, Central Pacific R. Co. v. 538 Valle, Bean v. TLL Valley Lode 487, 494 Van Auken, Electro-Magnetic M. & D. Co. v. 218 Vanderbilt Lode 357 Vandergrift’s Appeal 779 Vandergrift, Brown v. 33, 108, 157 —, Phillips v. 164 Van Doren v. Plested 201, 482 Van Meter v. Chicago & Van Meter C. M. Co. 172 Vannoy, Rhea v. 764 Vansickle v. Haines 657 Van Valkenburg v. Huff 212 Van Zandt v. Argentine M. Co. 217, 321, 449 289, 294, 470 Vaughn, Butte C.& D.Co.v. — 647, 670 Venard, Hoffman v. 367 Venture Oil Co. 7. Fretts 77, 174, 175 —, Rend »v. 723 Vermont Stone Co., South Dakota v. 20 TABLE OF CASES. Versailles Fuel Gas Co., Lynch v. —:167 , Penn Gas Coal Co. v. 191, 684 Vervalen v. Older 18 Vesta Coal Co., Pringle v. 685 Veta Grande Lode 356 Victor, Lentz v. 335 Victor Coal Co. v. Muir 786 Victor Mining Co. v. Morning Star M. Co. 687 Victoria Copper M. Co., Haws v. 241, 334 Vipond, Commonwealth v. 784 Virginia & Gold Hill W. Co., Cole S. xlvii Watkins v. Garner 559 Watrous, Mudsill M. Co. v. 708 Watson, Horner »v. 636 — v. O’Hern 102, 103 —, Phillips z. 593 — v. U.R. & G. Gravel Co. 21 ——, Wardell v. 40, 84, 581 Watt v. Dininny 139 Watts v. Cummins 715 Tibbals 6 Way Up M.Co., Tombstone M.Co. v. 462 Weakland v. Cunningham 46 196, 647, 662 — v. M. Co. v. 641, 719, 720| Weaver, Conger v. Virginia Lode 581 | —— v. Eureka Lake Co. 649 Vogel, Webber v. 589 | ——, Foster v. 715 Webber, Sweet v. 282, 274, 290, 327 —— v. Vogel 589 W.& R. R. T. P. R. Co., Morris v. 189 | Wedekind v. Craig 529 Waddell’s Appeal 595, 598 | Weese v. Barker 258, 311, 695 Waddell v. Simoson 791 | Weibbold, Davis v. 198, 517, 520 Wadsworth v. Marshall 790 | Weill v. Lucerne M. Co. 299, 346 ‘Wagner, Jones v. 677, 681 | Weimer v. Lowery 663 Wakefield v. Sunday Lake M. Co. 151 | Weinstein v. Granite Mountain M. Co. 412 , Sunday Lake M. Co. v. 170 | Weist v. Grant 716 Waldron, Lorenz v. 664 | Welch, Rupley »v. 196, 649 Walker v. Southern Pacific R. Co. 630] Welland v. Huber 212 —— v. Tucker 91, 106, 146, 579 | Wells, Forsyth v. 701 ——, Ware v. 654 | ——, Poire v. 261, 426, 521 Wallace, Harnish v. 544| Wendell, Polk’s Lessee v. 421 —,J.8. 406 | Wenner v. McNulty 250 —— v. Jefferson Gas Co. 193 | Wentz’s Appeal 13 ——,, Shaw v. 16, 40, 52, 699 | Wesley City Coal Co. v. Healer 787 —-, Stevenson v. : 677 | Wesling v. Kroll 170 Walrath v. Champion M. Co. 461 | West, Campbell v. 668 Walsh v. Hastings 555 | —— v. Owen 363 Walton v. Batten 379 | ——, Wheeler v. 68 —-, Jackson v. 704| West Granite Mountain M. Co. v. Wandering Boy 207, 362, 369, 373 | Granite Mountain M. Co. 232 Wapello Coal Co., Crabell v. 789 | West Pennsylvania Nat. Gas Co., War Dance v. Church Placer 492| Jones v. 164 War Eagle Mine 402 | ——, Ray »v. 162, 168, 164, 165 Ward v. Carp River Iron Co. 17, 18 | West Point Iron Co. v. Reymert 731 Wardell v. Watson 40, 84, 581] West Virginia Transportation Co., Ware v. Walker 654} Wood County Petroleum Co. v. 34 Waring v. Crow ‘287, 296, 335, 745 | Western Pacific R. Co. v. United Warnock v. DeWitt 284, 315] States 534 Warren, Montana Ry. Co. v. 188, 190 | Western Pennsylvania Gas Co. v. v. Sohn 774| George 143 Warren Mill Site v. Copper Prince 406, / Western Union Fuel Co., Oskaloosa 507| College v. 125, 696 Wasatch & Jordan Valley R. Co., Westmoreland Coal Co.’s Appeal 12 Snell v. 583, 591 | Westmoreland Coal Co., Hughes v. 126 Washington v. McBride 381, 532 | Westmoreland Nat. Gas Co. v. De- Washington County, Logan v. 44,115| Witt 80, 81, 32, 79, 82, 110, 733 Washington Lode 372 | Weston, Gill v. 142 Washington Nat. Gas Co. v. Johnson 1388 |, National Transit Co. v. 702 Water & Mining Co. v. Bugbey 527 | ——, Patrick v. 751, 760 Waterhouse v. Scott 412 | Wettengel v. Gormley 75, 17 Waterloo M. Co. v. Doe 218, 222 | Wharton, McCahan v. 97, 98 —, Doe v. 224, 237, 296, 362, 385, 393, | —— v. Stotenburgh 95 425, 457, 693 | Wheatley v. Baugh 672 Waters v. Griffith 57 | Wheeler, Hague v. 33 —— v. Stevenson. 187, 699 | ——, Hyman »v. 454 Watervale M. Co. v. Leach 4741 ——, McKinley v. 208, 204, 206, 286 xviii Wheeler v. Smith 199, 202, 357, 415, 480, — v. West 68 Whitaker v. Brown 85 White v. Barlow 660 — v. Lee 231, 479 — v. Manhattan Ry. Co. 323 —— v. Todd’s Valle ae Co. 646 White Cloud C. M. 862 Whitebreast Fuel Co. Carr vw 98, 120 Whiteman v. Severance 194 Whiting v. Hill 711 Whitman v. Haltenhoff 368 Wickersham v. Chicago Zine Co, oe Wienbroeer, McGlenn v. 201, 482 Wier’s Appeal 688 Wigeman, Taedéhiartes v. 769 Wiggerhaus, Sangamon C. M. Co. v. a Wiggins, Girard Coal Co. v. 789 Wight v. Tabor 217, 221, 878, 408 TABLE OF CASES. Wilson, Craw v. 764 —— v. Henry 574, 575 —, Morenhaut v. 198, 297, 808 ——., Roberts v. 294, 330 —— v. Smith 604 ——, Stephenson v. 574, 575 ——, Sweeney v. 816, 875 Wilson Gree Cc. M. & M. Co. »v. Montgomery 487, 494 Wimer v. Simmons 658, 669, 671 —— v. Smith Ue Winchester, Penn Coal Co. v. Winder, Hess »v, 821, 822, 825, 138 Wingate Placer 876 Winscott v. Northern Pacific R. Co. 381, 539 Winselman, Spencer v. 887 Winter Lode 222 Winters v. Bliss 879, 545 Winthrop M. Co., Original Co. v. 272, 290 Winton Coal Co. v. Pancoast Coal Co. 29 Wigton, Ashman v. 126} Wisconsin Central R. Co., Court- ——, Commonwealth v. 784| right v. 689 ——, Miami Coal Co. v. 694 | Wiseman v. McNulty 802, 755 Wilcox, Eaton ». 148, 158} Wixon v. Bear River & Auburn W. Wildman Quartz Mine 278, 315, 406) & M. Co. 620, 650 Wilhelm v. Silvester 472, 474 | Wolf v. Guffey 166 Wilkesbarre Coal Co., Common- — v. St. Louis Independent W. Co. 666 wealth v. 782 | Wolfley v. Lebanon M. Co. of N. Y. Wilkinson, Moore v. 419 218, 290, 358, 468, 464, 471 —,, Moxen »v. 276, 898, 479 | Wolfling, Richard v. 278, 548 — v. Northern Pacific R. Co. 586 | Wolverton v. Nichols 391, 398 Willauer’s Appeal 779 | Womble, Castle v. 222, 381 Willett, Clark v. 663 | Wood’s Appeal 778 Williams’ Appeal 129 | Wood v. Aspen M. & S. Co. 204 Williams, Aspen C. M. Co. v. 880, 882} ——, Henry 378 —_, Chalfont v. 102 | ——, Seymour v. 297 —,, Depuy v. 803 | Wood County Petroleum Co. v. West ——, Edward W. 222| Virginia Transportation Co. ——., Frederick N. 867 | Woodburn’s Estate 14 —— rv. Fulmer 627 | Woodburn, Berry v. 769 v. Gibson 87, 578 | Woodhouse, Fairbanks v. 287 — v. Guffy 100 | Woodruff v. North Bloomfield Gravel —v. Hay 684] M. Co. 286, 616, 619 —,, James v. 651 | Woods, Crandall v. 645 —, John E. 879 | Woodward, Audenried v. 129 —— v. Morrison 68|—— v. Delaware, Lackawanna & —— v. Mountaineer G. M. Co. 773| Western R. Co. 116 ——,, People ». 5 | ——, Lacey v. 278 —— v. Pomeroy Coal Co. 685, 700 | Woodman, Neuebaumer 327 —— v. Short 140 | Woolman v, Garringer 656 — v. Spurr 712) Worcester, Barry v. 70 —, Stevens v. 445, 450 | —— v. Green 89, 580 —— v. Toledo Coal Co. 778 | Worrall, Fisher v. 714 —v. Union Imp. Co. & J.T. Co. 627 —, United States v. 604 Williamson v. Jones 15, 29, 84, 789 Willis, Glacier Mountain S. M. Co. v. 286, 828, 884, 476, 570 Wills v. Blain , 888 —— v. Manufactures’ Nat. Gas Co. 119, 159, 168, 164, 165 Wilms v. Jess 67 Wilson v. Beech Creek Coal Co. 99 Wright, Bast Jersey Co. v. 41, 55, 59, 172 —, Lehigh & Wilkesbarre Coal Co. v. 99, 105, 122 ——, Leroy »v. 723 —, McGuire v. 141 —, Yandes »v. 679 Wulff, Manuel v. 205, 206, 328, 840, 399 Wyoming Coal & Trans. Co. v. Price 182 769 8| Wyoming Valley Coal Co., Fairfield v. TABLE OF CASES. xlix Yanves v. Wright 679 | Yuba County v. Cloke 622 Yappen, Maye v. 694 | Yung, Coal Co. v. 787 Youghiogheny River Coal Co. v. Pierce 73 ——, Robertson v. 685 | Zapie v. Central Pacific R. Co. 881 Young, Broman v. 74 | Zeckendorf v. Hutchinson 346 —, Catlett v. 788, 789 | Zimmerman, Northumberland County v. v. Ellis 168 783 —, Thompson v. 312 | Zine Co. v. Franklinite Co. 181, 132 Youngman, Clement v. 62, 66, 78 | Zollars v. Evans 216, 449 GEOLOGICAL PREFACE. Tuer extended experience of one of the authors in the work of a mining engineer and geologist has convinced him that it is abso- lutely necessary to have a clear understanding of the differences between the various kinds of mineral deposits and their mode of occurrence in nature, and also to know something of their origin, in order to properly appreciate many of the legal questions which have arisen in connection with them. In fact, some important legal distinctions are founded entirely upon these physical, or more properly, geological differences. Every lawyer who has a large practice in mining law should therefore have some knowledge of geology, and to such the author is glad to recommend the admirable works of Prof. Joseph Le Conte. By a careful study of these works he can get a better idea of American geology and of the fundamental principles of geology in general than from any other work with which the author is familiar. The information contained in the following pages —a large portion of which is very generally recognized by those versed in geological science, but which is not at all well understood by those unfamiliar with such science — will be sufficient, however, it is hoped, to give a general idea of the subject, and enable the reader to have a clearer understanding of many of the physical and geological differences between the various kinds of mineral deposits, and therefore to better appreciate the reason for the legal distinctions which are based upon these differences.! 1 For the definition of the term “min- and uses of the minerals herein referred eral” in a legal sense, see page lxxvi, under to, see a work by the author under the title division “ Natural Gas.” of “ A Description of Minerals of Commer- For a more complete description of cial Value,” published in 1897 by John the characteristics, the mode of occurrence Wiley & Sons, New York. hii THE LAW OF MINES AND MINING. GENERAL GEOLOGY. All rocks known to us are of two great classes, sedimentary and eruptive. First, Sedimentary Rocks, as implied by their name, are those which are of sedimentary origin. That is to say, they originated in accumulations, through the distributing agency of water, of (1) either rounded or angular pebbles or sand (minute quartz peb- bles) of (2) mud or finely divided clay, and of (8) calcareous silt (coral mud) or sometimes of minute shells, at the bottom of seas, lakes, and rivers. These three kinds of sediments, when consolidated, have made respectively pebble beds (conglomerates or breccia) or sandstones, shale or slate beds, and limestones. By far the great majority of these, and always the first two, must have been derived from the ruin or breaking down of other rocks, either eruptive or stratified, or both, composing land areas, and it therefore appears that most of these rocks are of littoral or near shore origin. The first two, sandstone and shale, differ from each other only in the degree of fineness to which the de- tached fragments have been ground in the process of erosion, which will be referred to later. Limestones, in many cases, have also had a somewhat similar origin. They have been formed by the degradation of great coral reefs and the subsequent pulverization of the detached fragments forming coral sand, or more frequently coral mud. It is thought by some that limestone beds have frequently been formed by the precipitation of carbonate of lime in the sea water. This theory of chemical origin may possibly be true in some cases, but the former physical theory of origin is regarded as more probable in the majority of cases. As might be inferred, many limestones have been formed from the erosion of pre-existing limestones, the fine granules being carried mechanically in suspension in water, and finally deposited as a sediment. Of course in the same way many beds of sand and of mud are derived from pre- existing sandstone and slate strata. Some limestone, chalk, and marble beds, however, are formed entirely from an accumulation (and subsequent consolidation) of myriads of small calcareous shells upon the sea bottom, — deep-sea ooze, for example; yet GEOLOGICAL PREFACE. liti all limestones are apt to contain various kinds of shells as they originally existed in a matrix of coral mud, in much the same way that shells on the sea floor, from very remote geological periods to the present, have become imprisoned in an accumu- lating bed of sand or of mud, which was brought to its present position through the agency of rivers or of ocean currents. With the exception of the so-called Primitive and Algonkian rocks (and in these they have probably been obliterated, owing to the fierce and numerous bakings which the rocks have received) nearly all sedimentary rocks contain evidence of many of the life forms existent in the ages when, as sediments, they were laid down. Of course these fossil remains are principally of marine origin, but the remains of many amphibian and land animals, and often of birds, have frequently been imprisoned in an accumulating bed of sand or mud, as, for example, in a lake, or in the alluvium of a river, or along a sea or lake beach. We are thus afforded an absolutely truthful but unfortunately very meagre record of the evolution of the various types of life forms from the earliest times. Now and then a bed of volcanic ash consolidated into hard rock is met with, or beds of infusorial earth formed from an aggregation on a sea bottom or lake bottom of the silicious remains of microscopic life forms (diatoms) ; but as these are rare, and as the latter appear to have been principally formed only in late geological times, the three classes of sediments above men- tioned, which when consolidated are referred to as sandstones, shales, and limestones, may be broadly considered as comprising all of the sedimentary rocks.! These sediments are nearly always commingled, and we have as a consequence sandy (arenaceous) shales and sandy limestones, shaly (argillaceous) sandstones and shaly limestones, calcareous sandstones and calcareous shales, sometimes referred to as marl beds. These names are applied to the strata formed by the de- posits accordingly as the original sand, mud, or calcareous matter predominates. On the other hand, it is often remarkable how very distinct they are from each other, owing largely in all prob- ability to the sorting effect of the water carrying the sediment, 1 It should be mentioned in passing of life forms have the faculty of abstract- that diatoms have the faculty of abstract- ing the carbonate of lime out of which ing the silica from the sea water in much their shells are made. the same way as the coral and other kinds liv THE LAW OF MINES AND MINING. and also to many unknown conditions surrounding their deposi- tion. These sediments, as can be readily understood, were prin- cipally laid down at the mouths of rivers, or on the sea bottom near to the shore line. In the majority of cases it is certain that the deposition of the sediment proceeded with inconceivable slow- ness. In some cases, however, it is certain that these sediments were deposited far from the shore, as ocean currents would easily carry such finely divided sediments a long distance from the shore, The origin of some chalk beds is probably explained in this way. After, and often before, being consolidated into hard rock (by pressure of superimposed sediments, and often by a cementing process due to the chemical action of some of the constituents of the deposited material, such as iron, lime, silica, etc., or by heat) these sediments have been raised and have become land areas. When consolidated, these form the ordinary stratified rocks with which all are familiar, and which form the greater part of the surface of the earth exposed to our examination. They are often found aggregating many thousands of feet in thickness. An in- dividual bed of any of the kinds mentioned in such a series of stratified rocks may vary from a few inches or even a fraction of an inch to hundreds and, in rare cases, several thousands of feet in thickness. They, however, usually alternate constantly, owing to the differing conditions which produced them. Familiar sections of Stratified Rocks (Geikie).! In some cases, and especially when they are of great geological age, these beds or strata have been heated or baked and com- pressed to such an extent that they have lost their original char- acter of sandstone, shale, and limestone, and have become respectively quartzites, slate, and marble beds. This metamor- 1 Many of the diagrams contained in purposely made very simple in character, this Preface are taken from well-known and are intended to render more clear the treatises on geological subjects. Others subjects discussed in the text. are from sketches by the author. All are GEOLOGICAL PREFACE. ; lv phism has often proceeded further, and has absolutely altered the character of these rocks, so that the original compact sandstone or shale has been converted into a rock totally different from its original character or that of the rocks which we know by these names. Such rocks, in a general way, are known as metamorphic or crystalline rocks. Among such as were originally in the con- dition of mud or sand, and subsequently, through consolidation, shale beds and sandstones, by further metamorphism we find many in the present form of slates, quartzites, gneisses, and gneissoid rocks in general, micaceous, talcose, and other schists, some so-called porphyries, some kinds of granite, etc. It is important to remember this fact, because many valuable ore deposits are found in the very old rocks of this description. They are usually, and sometimes rather loosely, referred to as Primitive Rocks, Archean and Algonkian Rocks, Crystalline Rocks, Metamorphic Rocks, etc. ZELELL LSA MSL Unconformity or later Sediments deposited on Evoded Surfaces of Upturned Strata (Le Conte). Upturned and Eroded Strata in Colorado (Hayden). 1 It must not be thought from this necessarily of sedimentary origin, for it is that all gneissoid and similar rocks are extremely probable that many of them vi THE LAW OF MINES AND MINING. The third sedimentary rock (limestone) cannot be metamor- phosed, generally speaking, further than marble, which is geo- logically termed crystalline limestone. Rarely, however, it has been converted into the rock known as serpentine.!_ Limestone, whether uncrystalline or crystalline, — in this country, however, usually when in the former ycondition,—is a most important repository of many valuable metallic ores, its calcareous nature having, in some way not always thoroughly understood, exerted a very favorable influence upon the deposition of mineral matter, especially of certain kinds. Much of this mineral matter, as will be seen in the latter part of this geological preface, was probably contained in hot waters which have come up through or in juxta- position to the limestone strata. SEconp, The second great class of rocks are those which are known as Eruptive Rocks, and which have all, at one time or another, been in a molten (semi-fluid or fluid) condition. The material from which these rocks have been formed came up from unknown depths or melted areas in the earth, either through the vents of volcanoes or more frequently through great or small cracks or breaks in the rocky crust above, and was poured out over the then surface of the earth. Sometimes, however, it has not reached the surface, but after coming up a certain distance was unable to ascend further, and subsequently slowly solidified far beneath the surface. In one form or another these rocks probably form a large portion of the earth’s interior, and un- derlie all stratified rocks, but at varying depths. It is not at all certain that they form the central mass of the earth, and they are by some supposed to occupy, generally speaking, a position between the outer crust and the interior central mass, whatever the nature of the latter may be. These eruptive rocks are of many kinds, owing to their differ- ent chemical composition. These are, in a general way, all of the granites (except some of the metamorphic granites above referred to), syenites, and porphyries, as well as the rocks which are very ancient and greatly metamor- phosed eruptives. The schistose structure of many of these rocks has probably been given to them by subsequent heating and great pressure. The researches of the Canadian Geological Survey have thrown much light upon the probable origin of many of these very old rocks, and some of the best Canadian geologists are disposed to doubt the original sedimentary charac- ter of many schists and kindred rocks. 1 Most serpentines, however, are changed eruptive rocks known as peri- dotites. GEOLOGICAL PREFACE. Wii are known as diorite, trap, diabase, basalt, phonolite, rhyolite, trachyte, andesite, gabbro, obsidian, pumice, etc. In mining, one usually meets with these rocks either as lava flows, when they form great beds often extending over large and usually very irregular areas, or as dikes which have welled up from below through crevices or cracks in the pre-existing and overlying rocks. These pre-existing rocks may have been either sedimentary or eruptive. This is merely a matter of accident, according ‘to the character of the rocks at the localities where the volcanic agencies to which the eruptives owe their origin have been acting. Thus we often find that dikes of trap or some other eruptive rock have come up through coal measures, and through the coal beds themselves. Often ore deposits, which in many cases had been formed before the injection of the molten material, are found to be cut in two by a so-called dike. At other times these eruptive rocks have come up in immense masses, pushing aside the strata above or extending their liquid tongues far out between the stratified rocks, usually along the lines of stratification or at a very small angle with them. They often appear to be stratified when this has occurred, and es- pecially is this true when they have been poured out over the bed of the sea in which sediments were being deposited and after- ward covered with sedimentary material. Sometimes we meet with a bed or flow of lava containing innumerable angular frag- ments of eruptive rocks cemented together by the lava. Some of these were very probably thrown out of an old crater, and in fall- ing became embraced in the lava flow; or more often these angu- lar pieces simply represent the unfused portions of the igneous rock of which the lava represents the fused portion, the two hav- ing been brought up together through the volcanic vent. It sometimes happens that angular rubble has been picked up by a lava flow. These rocks are called volcanic breccia. These eruptive rocks, especially when in the form of dikes, should be studied very carefully, because of the important part which they have played in the origin of deposits of the valuable metals or of their ores; for in the great majority of cases where deposits of these metals are found, eruptive rocks of one character or another are apt to be found traversing the neighboring country rock and often in the immediate vicinity, although the converse of this proposition is far from being true. It can be proven in a great lviii THE LAW OF MINES AND MINING. Dikes of one kind of Eruptive Rock cutting through mountain mass of another kind of Eruptive Rock (Geikie). many cases, not only that the region which became mineralized was very hot during this process, but that the dikes or eruptive rocks came up at approximately the same time that the ore de- posits were formed. The intimate connection between the two is thus established. The formation of the dikes is usually supposed and is often known to have preceded the mineralization; that is, the material from which they are formed was in the majority of cases injected before the latter process was begun. These dikes vary from a foot or less in thickness to thousands of feet, and may be traced across the country only a short distance or for many miles. Sometimes mountain masses are made up of dikes of one sort or another, or several kinds in juxtaposition or inter- secting each other. Those which are commonly recognized as dikes, however, are usually not very thick, being from one up to somewhat over one hundred feet. Examples of Dikes great and small. Example of Volcanic Neck of large area. GEOLOGICAL PREFACE. lix Eruptive rocks can usually be distinguished with great ease, not only from the position they occupy and the absence of the lines of sedimentation, but also by their general appearance, from any of the three stratified or sedimentary rocks above referred to; namely, sandstones, shales, and limestones. Sometimes, however, as in the case of some of the metamorphic rocks of both classes, it becomes difficult to do this. In such a case it is necessary to send a specimen of the rock to some accredited petrographer so that he may examine a section of it under the microscope. In this way its original character can usually be determined without difficulty. Rock Folding and Faulting. —It must be remembered that all these rocks, both sedimentary and eruptive, are frequently found to occupy positions now which are quite different from those originally occupied by them. Thus, consolidated sediments of thousands of feet in thickness may have lain for perhaps millions of years undisturbed in a nearly horizontal position, when, owing probably to the slow cooling and consequent irregular contraction of the interior of the earth, the so-called crust is thrust upon itself with an inconceivable force. By means of this pressure applied horizontally, or approximately so, nearly level strata are bent and twisted along certain lines of weakness in every conceivable manner, though they may have been the very hardest kind of rock. Of course all rocks, sedimentary and eruptive, composing the so- galled crust are involved in this folding or crushing, but it is more easily discerned in the case of the former than in the latter. Vol- canic action sometimes produces somewhat similar results; but when it has been the cause of the tilting of rocks, the disturbance has usually been regional, and very great areas have not been involved, as has been the case where the former agency has been operative. aes. wp ae avg . YY G5) SSS ., Bx Section of Appalachian Range showing folded strata (Rogers). Accompanying this folding or crumpling, but sometimes without it, as in the case of certain earth tremors produced by volcanic agencies, cracks or fissures have been established which reach to unfathomable depths, and the whole mass of rock on one side of Ix THE LAW OF MINES AND MINING. these cracks is often found to have moved up or down, bringing strata of different ages or different rocks, or different portions of the same rock, opposite each other. These slips or displacements vary from a few inches or less to many thousands of feet, and are common in all areas where there has been much folding or other evidence of regional disturbance, volcanic or otherwise. This establishment of cracks when there has been such a slipping is known as faulting, and these faults must be studied most care- fully in connection with ore deposits. They are, of course, just as abundant in eruptive as in stratified rocks. So-called dikes of eruptive material have often come up through them, having found in such fissures a convenient avenue of escape. Moreover, it is largely through the agency of crevices formed in some such way that the majority of the deposits of mineral matter, which we know as ore deposits, have had their origin, for the simple reason that were it not for these fissures or deep-reaching cracks the hot waters, or perhaps in some instances vapors, which have pro- duced many valuable deposits of ore, could never have come up with their load of mineral matter from the source from which they obtained it. The original sources of the elementary sub- stances, which, when subsequently deposited, usually combined with one or more other elements, form many of our metalliferous deposits, will be perhaps forever unknown; for we will probably never be able to know sufficient concerning the interior com- position of the earth at such depths below the surface as those Cx Re LEE LINES EELS SES ELIE >» oa ELLIE EEE SSG a Inclined and Vertical Faults. A group of Faults (Geikie). GEOLOGICAL PREFACE. lst from which many of them have certainly been derived. Later faults, long after the deposition of the mineral matter had ceased, have often cut these ore deposits in two, and in some cases they cause the miner a great deal of trouble. Soil. — Soil is usually the result of the gradual decay of the superficial portion of the solid or consolidated rocks beneath, and which are said to be in place; that is, through the physical and chemical agencies of rain, frost, or other atmospheric action the superficial portion of the rocks has gradually become rotten and has slowly dissolved into soil. A great portion of the soil of the world is of this description, and we observe here, simply, the first. step in the grand work of erosion, since solid rock must first be disintegrated by chemical or physical forces, or by both, before it can be removed by the rainfalls which carry off this material to the rivers and so down to the sea. In some cases, however, soil is alluvial; that is, it is composed of material (usually mud with some vegetable matter, and often including pebbles and sand) which has been brought from some locality more or less distant from that now occupied by it through the action of water. Many old river and lake bottoms furnish soil of this description. Somewhat similar in origin is the kind of soil which is produced by the recent raising from underneath the sea, of unconsolidated marine sediments. Thus the upper portions of many late Tertiary and Quaternary strata now covering land areas have become what we know as soil. For example, there is much soil of this description in the southern portion of the United States. But, generally speaking, most of the soil of this country, as of the rest of the world, is produced by the ex- ceedingly slow rotting of the upper portion of the solid rocks, stratified or eruptive, immediately underneath! It is thus easy to see that the value of land for agricultural as well as for min- ing purposes must always depend upon the geological conditions which may be found to exist over any given area. For example, limestone and some eruptive rocks, when they are superficially converted into soil, often make excellent farming land, while sand- stone and other classes of eruptives usually make poor land, etc. Erosion.— Another very essential point— and especially essen- tial in the study of mineral deposits — to which it is desired to call 1 In glaciated regions we often find and even soil have been shifted by the ice that large quantities of boulders, pebbles, sheet. xii THE LAW OF MINES AND MINING. attention is that one cannot overestimate the importance of the process which is known geologically as erosion, and which has operated everywhere on land areas since the earth cooled sufh- ciently to permit of oceans, Even those who have given much study to geological phenomena often fail to appreciate properly the huge mass of material which has been removed by the various agencies of erosion. These agencies are rain and the chemical atmospheric action mentioned, rivulets and rivers, the ever-acting agency of the sea beating upon a coast, glacial or ice action, etc. Glacial action, however, has not been nearly so important a factor as the others. All stratified rocks, often of many thousands of feet in thickness, have certainly been formed from the ruin or disintegration of previously existing rocks composing land areas which have been mainly eaten away by the sea, or by the action of rain falling upon, and of the rivers traversing, these areas. Even when throwing out of consideration the immense thickness of the older stratified rocks, which of course owe their origin to the ero- sion of ancient and unknown land areas, it is at present possible to prove that upon many portions of the earth exposed to our examination several miles in thickness, or rather in height, of solid rock have been removed from the surface of a given area, At any place whatever it is impossible to form a correct idea of the huge amount of material which has certainly been worn away, carried off, and deposited somewhere else. Erosion can be ob- served and studied to best adyantage in the case of stratified rocks, but we know nothing of the amount removed from the older rocks, sedimentary or eruptive, upon which, as the floor of some ancient sea, these sediments were laid. So on it goes, and probably will for countless ages, in what appears to be an endless cycle, always a tearing down and rebuilding, a never-ceasing con- flict between the forces which elevate continents, and the rainfalls which endeavor to reduce these to the common level of the sea. This is one of the reasons that we so often find nothing remain- ing of the outpouring of eruptive material, but only find the neck of an old crater or else the so-called dike, which occupies the vent or rift through which this rock came up when in a molten condition. The famous Palisades of the Hudson are an example of the latter. Practically all mountains, no matter how high, and other topographical scenery are due simply to the irregular action of erosion which has carved out valleys, often, though not always, GEOLOGICAL PREFACE. Ixiii indicating softer rock, and left standing the hills or mountain ridges, which frequently mark the position of harder or more unyielding rock. But from above the tops of these very hills or great mountains themselves there is good reason to believe, and in fact we frequently know, that thousands of feet of rocky mate- rial have been removed by exactly the same agencies. Whole series of strata of great thickness have often been slowly bent and fearfully crumpled, and thus elevated over vast areas, and then afterwards greatly eroded, giving rise to effects that could not be easily understood were it not for the appreciation of the grand results accomplished by the denuding agencies mentioned above. This is going on at the present time, but with incon- ceivable slowness, yet perhaps quite as rapidly as it has during different portions of the past many millions of years. Of course the denuding and rebuilding agencies have operated some- what more rapidly at certain times than at others, as in times when there was a great amount of precipitation, but, so far as is known, always with exceeding slowness. And yet we know that twenty or thirty thousands of feet of sediment, or even more, covering hundreds of thousands of square miles, were accumu- lated during a single geological age! It is the appreciation of these things which gives one a slight inkling of the absolutely inconceivable vastness of geological time. It also makes any attempt to compute this time most difficult; for, so far as we now know, we hawe no data of a definite charac- ter to reason upon. In the author’s opinion, any calculations based upon thickness of strata and other such data must of ne- cessity be very unsatisfactory, because we know nothing whatever of the conditions — amount of precipitation, etc.— which pre- vailed at the time these strata were laid down as sediments. All we know is that “time is long,” geologically considered, —so long, indeed, that the human mind cannot compass its vastness. The history of the world as recorded in its stratified rocks contains irrefutable evidence of an age equal to many millions of years, beyond which, however, lies that which Professor Le Conte aptly calls the “infinite abyss of the unrecorded.”’! 1 Lord Kelvin has recently given it as ever, it is submitted that these figures may his opinion that the earth solidified between be very far from the truth; such a distin- twenty and thirty millions of years ago. In guished authority to the contrary notwith- the present stage of our knowledge, how- standing. lxiv THE- LAW OF MINES AND MINING. Synclinal Fold. In the diagrams it will be observed that where the strata have been subjected to enormous pressure applied horizontally, and producing the folding already described, valleys have often been carved out of anticlinal rather than synclinal folds! This is due simply to the fact that wherever a start has been made in the top of such a fold, — sometimes through the original and constant assistance of some crack, which is very often a fault, — rain or snow water running either way down the lines of strati- fication or of sedimentation has been able, though with infinite slowness, to carve out a great valley — frequently a number of 1 Anticlinal folds are those where the pearance, whereas in synclinal folds they strata present to the eye a convex ap- present a concave appearance. GEOLOGICAL PREFACE. lxv miles wide and several thousand feet deep — much more readily. than in the case of a synclinal fold. This is the simple explana- Diagram showing gently folded Strata and Amount carried away by Erosion. tion of what otherwise appears to be a rather curious phenom- enon, and one which is constantly observed in nearly all regions occupied by gently folded strata. xvi THE LAW OF MINES AND MINING. KINDS OF MINERAL DEPOSITS. I. STRATIFIED MINERAL DEPOSITS. (a.) Non-metallic Minerals. Coal. — This is the simplest of all mineral deposits. Unlike most of the others, it is of sedimentary origin, and therefore it is clear that it must be distinctly stratified, and, moreover, that it cannot be found except in association with stratified rocks, usually strata of sandstone and shale. It is supposed that coal was derived originally from accumulations of decaying wood or other vegetable matter forming what are generally supposed to have been peat bogs or swamps. It is supposed that most of the beds of coal were formed at the mouths of rivers as they emptied into some gulf or brackish arm of the sea, because the fossils in the enclosing rocks are not those which are usually found in salt- water sediments. It is probable that they were formed usually at a place where the water was shallow, and where the areas covered by these peat bogs or original forest swamps were under- going a gradual subsidence; but after being submerged, owing to the more rapid accumulation of sediments of sand or of mud, these areas were reclaimed and again appeared above the surface of the water, when luxuriant vegetation is supposed to have again sprung up. This explanation is not in all cases absolutely satis- factory, except as to the gradual subsidence of the land and the contemporaneous and more rapid deposition of sediments. It has therefore been suggested that in the case of some seams of coal, a portion, if not all, of the vegetable matter from which the coal has subsequently been formed — ferns and other vegetable life of that day — was originally washed or drifted from some other locality than that where it was deposited and now lies. In other words, that in the case of some coal beds where it cannot be proven that the vegetable matter grew and rotted in situ, it was deposited in its present position somewhat after the manner of the other sedi- ments which accompany these deposits, that is to say, partially, if not in some cases wholly, through the assistance of moving water. While this is certainly not wholly true with regard to a large pro- portion of coal deposits, there may be much truth in the theory. GEOLOGICAL PREFACE. xvii Limbs of trees many feet long, now converted into coal, are some- times found lying horizontally in a coal bed which is not more than four or five feet in thickness, and yet nothing whatever can be found of the trunk or roots of the tree of which this limb formed a part, either in the coal itself or in the underlying or overlying strata. In fact, the line of demarcation between the coal bed and the sandstone or slate (rarely limestone), which overlies or underlies the coal bed, is frequently very abrupt. This phenomenon and that of the thin parting of slate (original mud), which has no roots whatever penetrating it, and which is so often found in a seam of coal, and is often almost as extensive as the coal bed itself, is more easily accounted for on this theory than on that of an original peat swamp. Again, while roots of trees are found in the case of some coal beds, as for example in England and in Nova Scotia, their absence in the underlying sedi- ments, as already implied, is significant of an origin somewhat different from that which is generally attributed to coal beds, and which supposes the vegetable matter to have grown and rotted in the place now occupied by it transformed into coal. In many cases, however, the latter theory of coal accumulations can be proved to be the correct one. It has been suggested that there Section of Coal Field in Ohio showing also an Interstratified Bed of Iron Ore. lxviii THE LAW OF MINES AND MINING. may be truth in both theories, and that both agencies may have contributed to the formation of what we now know as a bed of coal. There is much to recommend this view. It is quite certain, however, that the land area and, of course, the sea bottom, or sea floor, as it is commonly called, during these coal-making periods were undergoing a gradual subsidence, and in this way the fact of the existence of a great number of coal beds, — sometimes thirty to forty,-- one above the other, or younger than the other, with intervening strata of sand or of mud sedi- ments, with an occasional bed of limestone, is explained. Some of these original deposits of vegetable matter or coal marshes, ‘whatever their nature may have been, were evidently of great ex- tent, as is shown by the wonderful continuity and immense area, covering often hundreds and thousands of square miles, of some of the coal seams of the present day. Perhaps as the land under- went a gradual subsidence the coal marsh as gradually crept landward. Other seams are of very limited extent and very irreg- ular in shape, probably conforming, as is thought, to the shape of the original peat marsh or swamp from which the present coal is supposed to have been derived. Or, as suggested above, it is pos- sible in some instances that the irregular contour of the area occupied by present coal beds may be partly due to the irregu- larity in deposition of the original drifted accumulations of vege- table matter. In this general way we account for the fact that very frequently a coal bed, like a bed of sandstone or of shale, will get thinner and thinner until it ceases to exist; but a short distance further on a bed of coal will be met with in the same geological position; that is, between the same underlying and overlying rocks,— for example, between the same slate (shale) and sandstone strata. As is well known, a bed of coal is apt to be thicker at one place than at another, but we are not concerned immediately with these vagaries of coal deposits. It is sufficient for our purpose to remember that they are distinctly stratified and interbedded layers, extensive over very considerable areas, and varying from a few inches, or a mere band, to sometimes twenty or thirty feet in thickness, or rarely considerably more. The diagrams will give an idea of typical coal deposits, and will also show how portions of a coal seam and of the accompanying strata have often been carried away by erosion. Some of them will also show how these sedimentary rocks have been folded, GEOLOGICAL PREFACE. lxix and are not now lying in their original horizontal position. Of course the coal, being held within sedimentary rocks, must conform to all the twists and turns observed in the latter. An excellent example of folding of sedimentary strata can be observed in the anthracite region of Pennsylvania, and for this reason a diagram illustrative of a section of a portion of this region is inserted. Anthracite Coal Beds in Folded Strata, Schuylkill Co., Pennsylvania (Ency. Brit.). Kinds of Coal. —It is enough for our purpose to know that the various classes or kinds of coal, commercially considered, are determined principally by the amount of volatile matter which they contain, and that there is less and less of this according to the degree of heat and pressure to which they have been sub- jected, or usually according to the age of the deposit. Coal varies from rotting vegetation or, by further alteration, peat, at one end of the series, to graphite, or so-called “black lead,” at the other end of the series, according to the degree of metamorphism to which it has been subjected. This is often determined by the age of the coal, but not always, as local in- fluences, such as slow heat, like that produced by unusual com- pression, or more rarely heat from volcanic sources, may have assisted in altering the character of the coal. The original chemical composition of the coal itself may possibly have con- tributed somewhat to this result. Generally speaking, however, the oldest coal has been subjected to the greatest amount of change, and the youngest to the least amount. We have coal varying from peat to peaty lignite, or brown coal (always of very modern origin), then to true or black lignite. From the latter we find the lignite grading into bituminous coal, until we reach the true bituminous coal. From the bituminous we find it grading lxx THE LAW OF MINES AND MINING. into anthracite. The anthracites themselves vary greatly in their composition and in the amount of volatile matter which remains in the coal. As more and more of this volatile matter is driven off we find, as in the other grades, even the anthracite gradually becoming more and more graphitic in character, —like the coal of Rhode Island, for example, — until we finally arrive at pure graphite. The latter is usually found only in the oldest known sedimentary rocks. Of course coals vary greatly one from the other in the matter of purity. Some of them contain little or nothing outside of that contained by the original vegetable matter, to the decomposition of which they owe their origin. On the other hand, some are found containing great quantities of sand and mud, which were washed into or over the peat swamps forming, as is usually thought and has been pointed out, near the mouth of some broad river emptying into an arm of the sea. This sand or mud has of course remained in the coal ever since. Iron and sulphur are frequently found in coal, forming, when combined, iron pyrites, and affecting its value greatly. The lawyer, however, is con- cerned more with the geological or physical peculiarities of such a deposit; that is to say, its mode of occurrence, its general form, and its extent. As has already been stated, a single bed — espe- cially when the strata are horizontal or nearly so —is often exten- sive over a very large area, many square miles in extent. It is found close to the surface or at very great depths below it, accord- ing to the present topographical conditions of the country, — that is, according to the amount and extent of erosion, — or accord- ing to the position of the strata in which it is included, or very often according to what is called the dip or inclination of the same. This can be readily understood by reference to the dia- grams. In this connection the effect of erosion, which has carried away large areas of coal beds, along with portions of the strata which contain them, is also to be noted. As already stated, beds of coal vary in thickness from a few inches or a mere band to a number of feet, but the seams which are usually worked in this country vary from three feet or a little less to eleven or twelve feet. Sometimes, however, they greatly exceed this thickness. A coal bed does not always maintain its thickness, but is fre- quently found to be much thinner at some places than at others. In this respect, nevertheless, it furnishes a great exception to GEOLOGICAL PREFACE. lxxi most other mineral deposits, as it is much more regular and more nearly maintains its thickness than any other class of deposits. It is to be noted in this connection that a deposit of coal is properly referred to as a coal bed or coal seam, and not a coal vein. As will be seen hereafter, a vein usually presupposes an original break or rift — often an old fault — in the rocks, through which crack, mineralized waters have subsequently made their ascent. An accumulation of peaty material, however, being more or less a sedimentary deposit, is properly referred to as a bed, in the way we speak of a bed of sandstone, or bed of shale, or bed of limestone. Indeed we often have coaly (carbonaceous or bituminous) shales, or “ black slate,” as it is commonly called by the miners, containing, we will say, five per cent combustible matter and ninety-five per cent ash, which means simply that a little peaty or vegetable matter got mixed with the mud at the time the latter was deposited. Asphalt. — This is a curious mineral, the origin of which is not at all well understood. It is supposed, however, that it is derived from certain kinds of organic matter in salt water, — not fresh or brackish water, like coal, — whether vegetable or animal, or both, it makes little difference. It is a significant fact that it is always found in connection with sedimentary fossiliferous rocks, — from Paleozoic up to Tertiary, — and it is this which gives rise to the supposition that it has its origin in some kind of marine life, the structure of which may have been such as to leave no other evi- dence of its existence. It is a black tarry substance, with the peculiar odor of bitumen. Asphalt sometimes is found forming great pools or lakes, which in some cases have probably exuded from the inferior or adjoining rocks. An example of a deposit of this kind is the famous pitch lake on the island of Trinidad. More frequently it is found impregnating or saturating certain rocks, but only those of sedimentary origin ; that is, either lime- stones, sandstones, or shales. In some cases it is found impreg- nating a portion of a coal bed, and the so-called cannel coal is supposed by some to owe its extremely bituminous nature to an admixture with the coal seams of the organic material from which asphalt has been produced. In Kentucky, Indian Territory, Utah, and California there are quite thick strata which are in places heavily impregnated with Ixxti THE LAW OF MINES AND MINING. ‘this asphalt or bitumen. In some of these areas, where there are crevices or cracks in the rock, these crevices are filled with this bituminous substance or asphalt (Utah and California). Accord- ing to the amount of oxygenation which this substance has undergone in these cracks it has given rise to many different but kindred minerals, the principal among which are albertite (Nova Scotia), grahamite (West Virginia), gilsonite and ozokerite (Utah). Asphalt itself seems to be the residue of the distillation of the more volatile oils, or it may be that these oils have by some metamorphic agencies (heat, pressure, etc.) been con- verted into it. It is very variable in composition, and is usually mixed with extraneous material. With the exception of tlie lake of Trinidad mentioned, and some deposits in Venezuela, — where it is found in a very pure condition relatively speaking, and is dipped up, put into barrels, and shipped away in the crude state, — it is usually mined in connection with the rock which contains it, and it is used for paving material in this condition. This crude material, however, is usually refined. Very rarely it is found ‘forming what seems to be a coal bed, so absolutely stratified is it, and so comparatively free from impurities. This occurrence is, however, rare, and when seen, such a deposit is usually found to become, in a short distance, more and more admixed with the material forming the adjacent rocks. With regard to its mode of occurrence, therefore, it is only necessary to remember that it is usually found impregnating, saturating, or admixed with the material which forms some sedi- mentary stratum, and is never found in eruptive rocks, in which respect it is like coal, though differing from it widely in others. In Kentucky, Indian Territory, Utah, and California these strata are sandstones, while the chief asphalt deposits in Europe are in limestone. The veins or crevices in which the kindred minerals (gilsonite, etc.) above mentioned are found in Utah, California, West Virginia, and Nova Scotia would probably be classed in a legal sense, as they would certainly be in a geological sense, as true fissure veins, although they do not contain any metallic minerals. As those upon government lands are principally found upon land which is now included in Indian Reservations, the ques- tion as to their legal classification has not yet arisen; but upon the lines of reasoning followed by our courts with regard to recog- GEOLOGICAL PREFACE. lxxili nizing the geological or physical differences between the various classes of valuable mineral deposits, and basing important legal distinctions upon these, rather than upon the chemical or mineral- ogical differences of the substances contained in the deposit, it is suggested that since these minerals are found filling true fissures, the deposit would properly be located as a “lode,” and what is known as the law of the apex would rule. Mode of Occurrence of Interstratified Deposits of Asphalt. Petroleum. — Petroleum, or mineral oil, is as much a mineral in a legal sense as though it were of a metallic nature. Its origin is quite certainly more or less similar to that of asphalt, and prob- ably it and its kindred substances represent the more volatile oils, which either have been distilled off of the original deposit of bituminous material contained in shales, limestones, and sand- stones, leaving the heavier material (asphaltum) behind, or which, when subjected to metamorphic influences, were converted into it. It is often found in or above rocks which contain the deposits of asphalt; that is to say, the two belong to the same series of strata, or approximately so. In fact, it is supposed by some that many of the deposits of asphaltic sandstone and limestone, or other rocks with which this substance is admixed, simply repre- sent what is left of the original material, whatever it may have been, after vast quantities of petroleum and the more volatile oils and gases have escaped. Others contend that these asphalt deposits simply represent in themselves old oil pools converted into asphalt by being exposed to the atmosphere or other oxygen- ating influences. If the former theory is the correct one, as is probable, these asphaltic deposits, if they are now in the condition of asphalt, are 1 In the writer’s opinion this view does not conflict with the opinion of Secretary Teller, 1 L. D. 561. lxxiv THE LAW OF MINES AND MINING. to be found perhaps several thousand feet below the present sur- face, that is, considerably below the present oil-bearing strata ; and the more volatile substances (petroleum and natural gas), owing to the heat produced by the blanketing effect of the super- imposed sediments, or for any other reason, have escaped from this, their original source of bituminous material, and ascended until their further progress was checked by some impervious stra- tum. This is usually some bed of clay or slate (shale), or what has produced the same effect, the so-called “ shell” of closely cemented grit or other dense impervious material. In this way the oil and the gas which accompanies it have usually collected, and often in great quantities, in the open-textured or porous sandstones and grits beneath this stratum, but are not found in the other rocks of the series which are more dense. The latter are principally shales and fine-grained sandstones. It is, however, found in great quantities in limestone beds, but only where the surrounding con- ditions have made this a suitable repository. In this connection it should be remarked that oil, like water, is found only in rocks which are porous or contain fissures and cavities, great or small, z.e. sandstones or limestones. Conversely, the rocks which, like shales, are not water-bearing in a general sense are not oil- bearing. It must not be supposed that the oil generally occupies great or small subterranean cavities, although possibly it may rarely be found doing so, as in limestone. It usually occurs in nature as simply occupying the spaces or interstices or so-called pores between little pebbles and grains of sand in some rather open- textured but not necessarily incompact rock, or now and then is collected in the fissures and cavities of such rocks. Its source is quite certainly below the point at which it is at present found, because it will usually ascend and escape through any outlet it may find, owing to the elasticity of the accompanying gas. When there is a gentle roll or anticlinal fold or “saddle” in the strata, oil and gas are often found occupying, though very irregularly, positions in the crest of this fold underneath the impervious stra- tum. It does not seem to be found in large quantities in strongly folded strata, owing to the fact that the metamorphic agencies which caused the folding and tilting of the rocks have either con- verted the lighter oils into the more solid asphalt, or, as is more likely, the upturned and eroded strata have afforded these light GEOLOGICAL PREFACE. lxxv oils a good opportunity to escape. When the rocks, however, are lying level it is impossible to tell where it will be found, except to say generally that if found at all it is likely to be met with in certain oil-bearing strata. The random drilling of exploratory holes is the only way to test such a region. The depths at which it is found in this country usually vary from five or six hundred feet to very often upward of three thousand feet. The sinking of a new oil well in a so-called “pool” often interferes with the production of a previously existing well in close proximity to it. These so-called pools in the oil-bearing sandstones or so-called “sands” are simply localized areas of oil-bearing territory in certain and, by experience, well-recognized strata, usually sand- stones or grits, as in Pennsylvania and California. They may be found, however, in the fossiliferous strata of any age, from Silurian (in Ohio) to Devonian, Sub-carboniferous and Carbon- iferous in Canada, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, etc.; Tertiary in Russia. It is sometimes found in limestone, which in Ohio has been the chief oil-producing rock. These pools are most irregular and indefinite in shape, no two being alike. When broadly considered, they are often found to have a certain trend or definite direction across the territory in which they are found, involving in some cases a number of States. Accompanying oil and natural gas, and in the same rocks in which they are con- tained, large quantities of salt water are frequently found.. It is not necessary here to go into further geological explanation of these facts. Natural Gas. — As intimated in the preceding description of oil deposits, natural gas is only another product of the same sub- stance which has produced both asphalt and petroleum, whatever that substance or source may have been. It simply represents the most volatile portions of such substances, — the heavier having been converted, as is supposed, into bitumen, — which volatile por- tions have been driven off by the agencies above referred to. It is always found on top of the oil when immediately associated with it, but sometimes it is found isolated and far beneath the oil-producing strata in the vicinity. This is simply due to the fact that it was checked at this point in its upward course and collected there. Give it a chance, and it will always rise 1 By act of Congress, February 11, 1897, petroleum lands must be located as placer claims. lxxvi THE LAW OF MINES AND MINING. above the oil, being more volatile. While not a mineral in a mineralogical sense, it is so considered in law. For in a general legal sense any valuable inert or lifeless substance formed or de- posited in its present position through natural agencies alone, and which is found either in or upon the soil of the earth or in the rocks beneath the soil, is a mineral. With a number of exceptions — such as coal, graphite, limestone, infusorial earth, asphalt, pe- troleum and natural gas, phosphate rock, guano, nitrate of soda, amber (fossil resin), etc.— these substances are of inorganic origin. The above definition is of course not a definition of the term as used in geology or mineralogy, but only as used in law and in commerce. Sulphur. — This is a non-metallic mineral which has great com- mercial importance. Its principal occurrence in nature is either in the form of native sulphur or of a mineral known as iron pyrites ; that is, a combination of sulphur and iron. Native sulphur is found in large quantities in the neighborhood of extinct volcanoes or in craters of the volcanoes themselves, such as in the crater of Popocatepetl, etc. There are many deposits of it in the Andes, and in Mexico and in Sicily; but it is also found in this country, as, for example, in Nevada, Utah, Yellowstone Park, and elsewhere, but always in very irregular superficial deposits. It is nearly always impure, that is, admixed with extraneous matter. Iron pyrites, however, is a very different substance, and is a glistening yellowish mineral, which has been formed in the great majority of cases from the contemporaneous deposition and union of sulphur and iron solutions in presumably ascending hot alka- line waters or possibly vapors. This has been deposited in vast quantities in rifts or breaks in the rocky crust, and in other places in it suitable for the deposition of such mineral solu- tions. Itis very often found in pockets or seams in limestones near eruptive rocks, or at the contact between these eruptive rocks and the limestone, or some other rock, through which the eruptive rock when in a molten condition came up. Pyrites is mined in great quantities in Spain, Portugal, Newfoundland, and in the United States, but, for matter of that, all over the world, principally, however, for the other metals which may be associ- ated with it, such as gold, silver, copper, nickel, etc., and which will be considered hereafter. It is a most important mineral, GEOLOGICAL PREFACE. lxxvil and of very common occurrence in nature. . For these reasons it will be referred to again under its proper classification as one of the metallic minerals. It is referred to at this time only because large quantities of sulphuric acid are manufactured from it. Phosphate Rock.— This is a very peculiar mineral, which is found in large quantities along the Atlantic border of the United “States. Its chief use is in the manufacture of fertilizers. SENET Ls KS O BBR SS EI SS Ie NE LL EERIE ESIC SERS Sy Ey foo RRERES. ERS RRR ENS IEEE ROO ROR oy PP EPR EO BEER RO OE RE ON ORR SOOES LESS ESS ENR SOS I Ideal diagram showing Superficial Enrichment of Iron Ore Deposits, Michigan and Minnesota. 1 These three ores when chemically metallic iron. It is very high grade ore pure — that is, when the iron contained of either class that shows a percentage in them is united only with oxygen, which six or seven units less than the possibilities purity is never met with — can respectively mentioned. contain 59.8, 70, and 72.4 per cent of lxxxviii THE LAW OF MINES. AND MINING. Occurrence of more or less Stratified and Pockety — or Irregular — Iron Ore Deposits. Mode of Occurrence of Contact Iron Ore Deposits which are certainly due to the Oxidation of Iron Pyrites. Manganese. — The principal use of this quite important metal is in the manufacture of steel. It is derived principally from two ores,— oxide of manganese and carbonate of manganese. These ores, especially the former, occur quite abundantly in nature, although nothing like to the same extent as iron. The chief supply of manganese is drawn from perfectly strati- fied sedimentary beds, as in Chile, Russia, Cuba, etc., although in the United States its occurrence is very much more pockety. In this country it is chiefly found in beds of clay resulting from the disintegration of some certain kind of rock, which may be either original sandstone, as in Virginia, or limestone, as in Arkansas. It is chiefly found in irregular masses varying from less than an ounce to many tons in weight. There is, however, every reason to believe that the manganese was in the original rock which has dissolved into clay; that is to say, when this rock rotted into clay the manganese ore remained in the latter in some cases in somewhat the same position as it was originally deposited in the sedimentary material which was afterward consolidated into hard GEOLOGICAL PREFACE. Ixxxix rock. But it is much more probable, in the majority of cases, that what has been referred to as the process of superficial enrich- ment may have taken place in the majority of these deposits in somewhat the same manner as in the iron ore deposits which have already been described, so that these nodular masses of man- ganese ore in the clay represent the segregation of this material, the rock which originally contained it having contained it in a much more disseminated condition. These masses are therefore much larger and more abundant than they would have been otherwise.t The ore is usually confined to a certain stratum or certain strata in a series of sedimentary rocks, and it adheres to these strata with great pertinacity. This is simply due to the fact that the conditions for the deposition or precipitation of manganese ore were present when these particular sediments were deposited, and were not present when either the older or younger sediments were deposited. Whether the ore was originally deposited in the form of a carbonate or as an oxide is not proven, though many think that, as in the case of some iron ores, it was originally deposited in the form of a carbonate and has been subsequently changed to an oxide. This, however, is of small importance here. Occurrence of Manganese Ore in Clay Occurrence of Manganese Ore Inter- resulting from decomposition of Man- stratified with Sedimentary Rocks. ganiferous Limestone (Penrose). The other class of deposits are carbonate and silicate of man- ganese. The latter has never been used as a manganese ore, although it is quite common in our western United States, where it often marks the outcrops of fissure veins, having been oxidized superficially to the common black oxide of manganese. It is usually very impure. The deposits of carbonate of manga- nese are beginning to attract attention. For example, in the 1 The peculiar mammillated or rounded appearance of these nodules lends force to this theory. xc THE LAW OF MINES AND MINING. Pyrenees they are being worked quite extensively at the present time. The mining of manganese ore in this country has so far pre- sented very few legal difficulties, for the simple reason that all the deposits of this mineral have been usually in the eastern por- tion of the United States, where, as has been stated, the common- law maxim of cujus est solum ejus est usque ad celum prevails. Upon lands belonging to the government there are, however, in the western United States, deposits of very impure manganese ore, which mark the outcroppings of some fissure vein (e.g. near Butte and elsewhere in Montana) or more irregular pockety deposits (e.g. in the Leadville district), as above stated. Should these classes of deposits ever possess value, the law applicable to lode claims would usually prevail, unless, as in the case of some iron or of the more valuable ores, the deposit should be of such a pockety or bunchy, that is to say irregular, discontinuous type, as to make this improper.!_ This will be made clear hereafter in discussing vein and kindred deposits. Attention is simply called to the fact that deposits of man- ganese ore, which are valuable for the manganese which they contain, like some beds of iron ore, are in the great majority of cases found forming distinctly stratified beds or parts of a dis- tinetly stratified stratum, or in the clay derived from the decay of such a stratum; and hence when so found upon government lands it would appear that the law as to the location of a lode claim should not be applicable to them, for the same reason that it should not be applicable to stratified beds or pockety deposits of iron ore, as distinct from iron ore found as the capping of a fissure vein or true lode. When so found, therefore, manga- nese deposits should, generally speaking, be located as placer claims. Aluminum, — The ores from which this metal is extracted are rapidly assuming commercial importance. At present there are but two ores of aluminum broadly considered. One is known as cryolite, a large deposit of which is found in Greenland, but which is not common elsewhere. This mineral is composed of sodium, aluminum, and fluorine. As it is not found in large 1 The ore in the croppings of fissure much value as manganese ore, though it veins is, however, so impure and superfi- is often valuable for the silver and other cial that it is not likely ever to possess metals with which it is associated. GEOLOGICAL PREFACE. xci quantities in this country, it does not immediately concern us. It is sufficient to say that if ever found it would probably be found as a veinstone, and, like other veinstones, has been deposited in some crevice from solutions in water. The other ore of aluminum is known as bauxite, named from the town of Baux in France, where it was first mined in quantity. It is to-day practically the only ore from which aluminum is obtained. It is sometimes referred to as a very pure, though usually indu- rated, kind of clay in the form of concretions, which, owing to the small amount of silica and of other so-called impurities which it contains, is available for the purposes of making the metal aluminum. Such a clay as is suitable for making good bricks, for instance, is not, on account of the large amount of silica it contains, at all suitable, in the present state of the art, for making aluminum, although it may contain a considerable percentage of the métal. Bauxite is usually found in segregated masses or nodules (con- retions) in aluminous clay, which is sometimes quite pure, but often is more or less impure, representing the decomposition of the superficial portions of some stratum of rock, usually limestone or ‘dolomite (magnesian limestone). It is sometimes, however, found .in a more compact form. The minerals which compose it were probably contained in a more disseminated form in the undecom- posed or hard rock. When it has had such an origin, it much resembles some of the manganese deposits in the United States in its mode of occurrence and in the superficial, segregated, and nodular character of its deposits. While this theory of origin satisfactorily accounts for many of the phenomena observed in some of the European deposits, it does not apply to all of them, nor does it explain certain of the phenomena connected with the Georgia and Alabama deposits. The origin of these; as well as of the French deposits, is ascribed to the action of mineral springs or geysers. The deposits in the above mentioned States are found in connection with Silurian rocks, usually dolomite, but were very probably formed in Tertiary times through the agency of thermal springs. These waters are supposed to have come up through fault fissures and to have derived the alumina, which they held in solution and brought to the surface, from the underlying calcareous clay shales. This alumina is supposed to have been redeposited in a gelatinous form on or near the surface, during which or after xcli THE LAW OF MINES AND MINING. which deposition the concretions of bauxite were formed. In this way the basin-like character of the deposits is explained.1_ The French deposits, on the contrary, occur in more or less distinctly stratified beds, along with other lacustrine formations and in con- nection with Cretaceous limestone. They usually contain more iron than the ores of the United States. The chief use to which bauxite is put, however, is not in the manufacture of metallic aluminum, but of alum, g. v2 Quarries of Building Stone, etc. — Quarries of every description — that is, of sandstone, limestone, marble, slate, and all other rocks useful for building or ornamental purposes — are regarded, from a legal point of view, in the same light as sedimentary stratified deposits, although technically speaking it is certain that many of them are not of sedimentary origin or stratified. These, for ex- ample, are quarries of granite or some eruptive dike, such as trap, or a quarry of a rock formed from the superficial deposition of presumably hot water solutions such as “ Mexican Onyx ” or the rock “ Travertine,” of which the city of Paris is largely built, and which has had a different origin from common limestone. The eruptive rocks, however, with the exception of granite, basalt, trap, etc., are not quarried to any great extent, and therefore in a gen- eral way it is true that most quarries are of those rocks which form one of a series of sedimentary strata; such, for instance, are the red sandstone (brownstone), slate, and marble (crystalline lime- stone) quarries of New England. While the outcroppings of a number of fissure veins may be quarried in the western United States, it must not be forgotten that these are simply the outcrop- pings of lodes, and that they must not be regarded in the same legal sense as a quarry of some common building stone. Legally the common law maxim of cujus est solum gus est usque ad celum, which signifies in effect that the owner’s right is complete within the downward vertical extension of his boundary lines, and that 1 For an exhaustive and recent descrip- tion of the various American deposits see the Sixteenth Annual Report of the United States Geological Survey, Part III., — Mineral Resources, 1894, — page 547 et seq. 2 The other metalliferous ores, or so- called metallic minerals, wili be discussed subsequently and in their proper place. Tt must not be forgotten that the classifi- cation adopted by the author is based primarily upon the geological (physical) similarities or differences of the deposits of the various kinds of mineral substances which are mined by man; that is to say, such points of similarity or of difference between their mode of occurrence in nature as causes the same or different legal reasoning to be applied to them. GEOLOGICAL PREFACE. Xcill he has no right to mine anything outside of these limits, applies to all quarries when the material quarried is not a part of a lode deposit. For this reason, under the United States law they cannot, when upon lands belonging to the government, be taken up otherwise than as a placer claim, which will be treated at length further on, and to which the above maxim applies in contra- distinction to a lode claim. As will be seen hereafter, these two are very different, especially in respect to the rights of the owner with regard to following the ore deposit outside of his boundary lines. Placer Deposits in General. — These deposits are always alluvial or detrital. By these terms is meant that the material forming the deposit is composed of boulders or gravel admixed with sand, and sometimes mud or clay, all of which have certainly been derived from the wearing away of solid rock, or rock in place, further up the ancient or present stream, in the valley of which these alluvial or detrital deposits are found. If one reflects upon what has been said under the head of erosion, it is at once seen that when the rocks in any drainage area contain veins, large or small, or other deposits of metals, these metals or their ores, or the solutions of these, will be carried down with the other material forming the country rock, in the carving or sculpturing out of the valley. It these metals or their ores are quite insoluble in ordinary meteoric waters, it also follows that they will be deposited and will remain with the pebbles or other material forming the alluvial deposit.! On the other hand, however, if they are soluble in such surface waters, they will be taken into solution and carried off, probably finally reaching the sea, if they should not be redeposited, as will be explained later. Now, generally speaking, there are only a few metals that are with great difficulty soluble in such waters. These are principally gold, platinum, and tin. There are two or three others equally insoluble, such as iridium, palladium, etc., but they are unimportant. All other metals — copper, silver, etc. — when exposed for a long time to the chemical action of the atmos- phere and surface waters, are slowly taken into solution and carried off,and are not found, at least to any great extent, in such detrital or gravel deposits. These so-called placer deposits have supplied by far the greater amount of gold that has been produced in the world. They also 1 See further description of formation of gold placers on pages xciv, xcv. xciv THE LAW OF MINES AND MINING. supply practically the entire amount of platinum and most of the tin of the world. In the case of the latter metal, however, instead of being in a pure or native state, it is found in the form of tin ore or the so-called “tin stone” (oxide of tin), which, like the pebbles of phosphate rock already described, is soluble with great difficulty, and is therefore left behind with the other insoluble matter, such as the ordinary quartz and other pebbles or sand with which it is associated. aK \ y REC Ra. \ Nos QC AN \ tip ig Diagram showing Origin of Auriferous Gravel. These stratified beds of gravel or so-called placer deposits are of such vast commercial importance that they deserve to be treated of in some detail, and classified by the name of the metal for which they are worked. ‘The description above given is suffi- cient to give a general idea of what they are. Gold Placers. — As above stated, a very large portion of the gold of the world is derived from this source. In our western country gold to the value of hundreds of millions of dollars has been taken from various placer deposits which have been worked with varying success since the discovery of gold in this form in California. These placer gravels have been in some cases consolidated into hard rock, forming a bed of grit,—or conglomerate, as it is called. But usually these gravel beds are as yet in an unconsoli- dated state, and are therefore easily washed down by the action of powerful jets of water. The accompanying illustration gives an idea of how such a gravel bank is attacked. They are often worked, however, in other and very much more primitive ways. In many cases the gravel is overlaid by a flow of lava, — which is of course now in the condition of hard rock, and has in itself pre- vented the washing away of many important gold bearing gravel beds. An illustration of this is also given to show two things: first, the great amount of material removed by erosion; and, second, that the present mountain top was once the bottom of ° a river, the valley of which was afterward followed by an out- pouring of lava. No doubt these placers give rise to other GEOLOGICAL PREFACE. XCV placers; but it is certain that the minute seemingly water worn particles, or perhaps the larger nuggets of the gold, were origi- nally in this form or another in veins, great or small, — that is to say, in place in the solid rock which formed a part of the mountain range. It has been suggested, however, and probably with some truth, that the minute nuggets of gold, or even those of considerable size, which are extracted from placer deposits have been formed in the gravel in their present position by precipitation from the creek or river water containing the gold in solution. If it is admitted that gold is even slightly soluble in the water which most creeks and rivers contain, then this theory would have much to recommend it. It seems remarkable that these nuggets of gold, sometimes of very considerable size, are very rarely met with in vein mining, though abundant in placer gravels. Sometimes there is found what is known to the placer A, : 4 LYVETES ALITA rs ff yy EZ LILI YUM) Section of Table Mountain, California, showing Old River Gravel covered and protected from Erosion by a bed of Lava (Whitney). Later River Gravel shown on either side. Vp T/), YMA Flume and method of attacking Gravel Bank in Hydraulic Mining (9th Ann. Rep. State Mineralogist, California). miner as “ wire” gold, the edges of which are very sharp, and do not show any evidence of having been rolled or abraded by the action of water and sand. There seems to be every reason to believe that the so-called “wire” gold of the placer miner was deposited in its present position in the gravel or sand surrounding xevi THE LAW OF MINES AND MINING. ° it, from waters which had derived the gold from a section of the country nearer the source of the stream traversed by gold bearing and usually pyritiferous veins. If this is admitted, it is easy to understand how what may possibly be small nodular segregations — which we know as grains or nuggets — may have been formed.! The fact that the richest portion of the deposit is near or upon bed rock, or near or upon a “false” bed rock, is explainable by this theory. This view of the disposition of gold in placer gravels finds favor among many scientific men ; but it is not necessary to discuss it further. It does not necessarily follow that the discoveries of rich vein deposits nearer the source of the stream (present or ancient) will follow upon the discovery of a rich placer ground below; for, as can be readily imagined, a great number of small veins, each in itself too small to be profitably worked, may yield when eroded a large amount of gold in the aggregate, and form a very much more valuable placer ground at varying distances below the posi- tion of the veins. It is simply nature’s way of concentrating gold, —an accident which has been taken advantage of by man. There are some rocks (conglomerates, grits, and sandstones) which now contain a great deal of gold, copper, etc., bué which certainly did not contain these metals when they were laid down as sediments. These rocks are in the majority of cases tilted or turned on end, and some deep break has occurred either in them or in close proximity to them; so that the waters or vapors con- ‘taining these metals in solution, and which have subsequently ascended through or near them, found in them a suitable reposi- tory for their solutions. The famous Calumet and Hecla copper conglomerate offers a good example, as well as certain copper mines in Bolivia in sandstone, and some of the gold in South Africa is said to occur in much the same way. That is to say, it is found filling some of the interstices between the pebbles in a way that makes it very probable that it got into the stratum subsequently to its consolidation and being tilted, — probably to its present position,—and not as grains and nuggets when the deposit was accumulating. The writer has seen a deposit of somewhat similar character to this in South America, and there 1 Tt has been pointed out, on the other mammillated appearance of many nodular hand, that these grains and nuggets of segregations. gold do not present the round or peculiar GEOLOGICAL PREFACE. Xevil is no doubt that it is of more common occurrence than is gen- erally supposed.! ~A ~~ ~ Wi, MM Ly. Section showing Auriferous Gravel overlaid by Lava, also effect of Erosion since the outpouring of the Lava (9th Ann. Rep. State Mineralogist, California). These latter deposits would very probably in the majority of cases (always providing that the ore of valuable metals in them is reasonably continuous) be regarded from a legal point of view in the same light as fissure veins or as lodes, and under our United States statutes should be so located. They are mentioned simply in order that no confusion may arise. It is usually very easy to determine whether they were originally placer gravels, or whether the metals which they contain found their way into them subse- quently and after consolidation and upturning of the rock. In California it has been decided that an old bed of placer gravel, now covered by a capping of lava and tilted so that the gravel bed dips at a considerable angle, has nevertheless not lost its distinc- tive character as placer ground, and should be located as such, and that therefore a location upon it as a lode is improper. Platinum Placers. — As above stated, practically all the platinum of the world is derived from deposits of gravel or placer ground. This country supplies only a small quantity of this valuable metal, the great majority of the supply coming from the Ural Mountains in Russia. It is found, however, in small quantities in Northern California, Oregon, Washington, throughout British Columbia, and in small quantities in South America, nearly always associ- ated in these localities with gold in the gravel. Quite a good deal of iridium is found along with the platinum, but it possesses at present comparatively little commercial importance. As in the 1 Some geologists, however, think that that the gold accumulated therein in the the gold in the famous conglomerate bed same manner that it accumulates in any of South Africa was deposited therein placer deposit or gravel bed forming along when the bed in question was in the form a river bottom or sea beach, as already of unconsolidated gravel. In other words, described. g xevili THE LAW OF MINES AND MINING. case of gold, platinum is found in small seemingly water worn and irregularly rounded nuggets or minute grains, which have certainly been derived from some vein or other deposit in the solid rocks further up the stream, and perhaps have been worn to their present shape by the action of water, or rather, to speak more accurately, by being rolled for ages by the force of mountain torrents along with the grains of sand and the gravel, admixed with which they are found. The same theory, however, which has been suggested with regard to the formation of gold placers (see discussion on pages xciv and xcv) may apply equally to the formation of plati- num placers. Tin Placers. — A very considerable portion of the tin of the world is found in gravel deposits, and is known as “ stream tin.” It has always certainly been derived, like the foregoing, from some vein or other class of deposit carrying tin ore in the solid rock formation further up the stream,— in the present or in the old bed of which the tin stone is found. The other two metals, gold and platinum, are always found in their native state, simply because they usually occur in this state in nature. Tin, however, as has been pointed out, does not occur native, but as tin ore, usually as tin oxide, which is very insoluble. It is therefore re- tained in the gravel below the tin veins or other tin deposits. Like the former, it is always very much water-worn, but also like them it can be readily separated from the pebbles or sand with which it is associated, owing to its greater weight. IL. UNSTRATIFIED MINERAL DEPOSITS. We have now considered all of the principal kinds of deposits, which, for the sake of convenience, we will call stratified or sedi- mentary mineral deposits, and to which the common law maxim of cujus est solum ejus est usque ad celum always applies when the owner of the soil is the same as the owner of the mineral rights; that is, when there has been no severance of these estates. Although, as we have seen, they may not always be technically ‘stratified, or in a geological sense sedimentary in character, they are such under the legal classification adopted in this book. In GEOLOGICAL PREFACE. xeix other words, the same law which would apply to any perfectly stratified mineral deposit, technically speaking, would apply in a general way, and, excepting the cases to which reference has been made, to all of the deposits which have been mentioned in the foregoing pages, unless expressly exempted by statutory provision or Land Office Regulation, —e. gy. coal and salines. We now come to treat of the mineral deposits belonging to the other great class, which are not only wholly different in a geo- logical and mining sense, but especially in the United States are different in a legal sense. For the sake of convenience and sim- plicity we will call them Unstratified Mineral Deposits, a large proportion of which are properly known as vein or lode deposits. The various valuable metals of the world are usually recovered from this or the other classes of deposits described in the fol- lowing pages; such as, for example, antimony, arsenic, bismuth, cobalt, a part of the gold, copper, a part of the iron, lead, mer- cury, nickel, a small part of the platinum, silver, a part of the tin, tungsten, zinc, as well as a number of others of less importance. Generally speaking, a vein or lode represents some break or rift in the rocky crust of the earth, usually penetrating to great depths, through which channel mineralized waters have ascended, and in which, on the sides of which, or in the rocks adjacent to which, they have deposited their mineral solutions until these have slowly filled’ and choked up the crevice. It must not be thought that these rifts were originally necessarily always wide-open cavities, for in many cases it is certain that they were very often simply small cracks, the original distance between the walls being, perhaps, in many cases less than an inch. This, however, has been sufficient to admit of the ascent of hot mineralized waters, which, owing to their peculiar character, have often, though by no means always, dissolved away a portion of the wall or country rock on either side, sometimes one, sometimes both, and deposited in the place of this rock some of the mineral matter which they contained in solution. These waters appear to have contained a large amount of sulphur, or at least to have been accompanied by an abun- dance of sulphurous vapors. In this way the common combina- tion of this element with nearly all of the metals deposited in this manner is explained. The exact source of much of the mineral matter so deposited, and especially of the valuable metals 1 See extended discussion of veins or lodes in the next division, c THE LAW OF MINES AND MINING. contained in it, will, as has been suggested, probably remain for- ever unknown to us, for these metals have been originally derived from depths which can never be subjected to our examination. It is not necessary in this work to go into a more detailed discussion of the source of these metalliferous waters, or as to the man- ner in which they derived the metals which they subsequently deposited. The author is, however, ready to admit, and anxious not to neglect to state, that owing to certain more or less well-known causes the upper or superficial portions of many veins and other deposits of nearly all metalliferous ores frequently show, and often to a remarkable extent, evidence of what is known as su- perficial enrichment. This, as has been thoroughly explained in the case of iron ore, simply means the concentration or the enrichment of the ore in the upper portions of a deposit which have been exposed to the chemical (oxidizing) influence of the atmosphere and of surface waters. This enrichment of the super- ficial portions of an ore deposit has taken place more frequently, and is more generally applicable than is supposed. That many mines of the world are shallow, the ore ceasing to maintain its value as the vein is followed downward below the depths to which the oxidizing agencies have been in operation, is largely due to this fact. It is simply, like the placers, another case of nature’s ste s eS so BIC Ses ES & 2 RO Nj q S N Diagrams illustrating Occurrence and General Character of Fissure Veins; the last is illustrative of Superficial Enrichment (Phillips, Dana, Le Conte). GEOLOGICAL PREFACE. Cl accidental concentration of riches which is taken advantage of by man,} It does not always follow that the hot waters which originally brought up the mineral matter have come up through some more or less straight break or crack, but it often happens that they have gradually worked their way up from the depths from which they derived their mineral solutions, through any cracks or breaks, great or small, which they could find, and at the same time, by acting very irregularly, and by dissolving out isolated and frequently disconnected portions of the rock, through which they passed, have deposited their load of mineral matter in these places, or at such other places where the conditions for deposition were favorable. The result of this is that we often have ex- tremely irregular and disconnected deposits, or what are known as pockets, nests, or bunches of ore. These occur most frequently in a rock which in itself is easily soluble, chief among which, as is well known, is limestone. In this connection one has only to remember that most of the caves of the world are in lime- stone strata, and that these great caverns have certainly been eaten out or dissolved out by the slowly acting agency of water, hot or cold, through countless ages. Some eruptive rocks, how- ever, also readily admit of this process of replacement or substi- tution. Hot waters would of course dissolve such a rock more readily than cold waters, owing to the action of which many caves are supposed to have had their origin. These irregular deposits will be described at length in their proper place, but the importance of having clearly in mind the dis- tinction between them and the more regular veins or lodes cannot be overestimated, because few things have given rise to so much litigation in the United States 1 Tt has been ingeniously suggested by Professor R. A. F. Penrose, Jr., that in many instances there has not been the great amount of erosion that is commonly supposed to have taken place since the fill- ing of the vein or other kindred deposit with the valuable mineral matter which it contains. He has further suggested that if this is true, it is easy to understand why there should bea greater deposition of cer- tain mineral solutions nearer the surface than at great depths, simply because of the fact that the hot waters containing as the physical and geological them would be under less pressure nearer the surface than at great depths, and would be apt to deposit the solutions which they contain as they approach the surface owing to the relief of pressure. This is a very able explanation, and one which probably contains much truth, The subject, however, is a very vexed one, and but little is known concerning it. The conditions surrounding deposits in differ- ent localities are so widely different that it is impossible to lay down any general rule. cli THE LAW OF MINES AND MINING. nature of a given ore deposit. It makes a great difference whether or not it should be regarded in the eye of the law as a vein or lode deposit, and made to possess all the legal attributes of such a deposit, or whether it should be regarded as one of a more uncertain, pockety, discontinuous, and disconnected nature, which, like a quarry of building stone, is properly located only as a placer deposit when upon lands belonging to the government. The difference between the following classes of deposits are clearly defined, and are easily appreciated by any one who is not only scientifically familiar with the subject, but who has also had wide experience in many different kinds of mineral deposits, That the testimony of a man of no scientific knowledge, and whose experience has been limited perhaps to a single mining camp, should be taken upon a subject involving such important interests is preposterous, although it is just such testimony as this, followed up by a lack of knowledge on the part of lawyers and judges concerning the fundamental differences between these classes of metalliferous deposits, which has given rise to so much confusion in our mining law. For the reason that a large proportion of the mining litigation in our Western States, especially with regard to gold and silver deposits, has been directly or indirectly based upon the differences between the following kinds of deposits, and that the question of the proper classification of a given valuable deposit is certain to be frequently raised again, the different characteristics of ore bodies will be described in the following pages at considerable length. While the deposits worked for the extraction of these two metals, gold and silver, have been, and will continue to be, most important in mining, as well as in a legal sense of those which are worked in this country, especially in the portion of it west of the Mississippi River, it must be remembered that the kind of metal or “other valuable mineral substance” which the deposit contains has nothing whatever to do with the geological or legal distinctions which will be made. For instance, exactly the same remarks as have been made with regard to gold and silver de- posits would apply to deposits of antimony, arsenic, bismuth, cobalt, copper, in some cases iron and manganese, lead, quick- silver (mercury), nickel, tungsten, and zinc. In a word, it is always the geological peculiarities of a given deposit, and not the character of the ore contained in it, which determines the nature of the legal reasoning which should properly be applied to it. GEOLOGICAL PREFACE. cili A. UNstratiFigD MineraL Deposits WHICH ARE REGULAR. (a.) Fissure Veins and True Lodes. Generally speaking, these are better known as Vein deposits, or frequently as Lode deposits. They must not be thought to be always a vertical crack, filled with mineral matter, running for a great distance across the country, and uniformly rich throughout its entire lateral and vertical extension, for such veins are rare, and, practically speaking, are never met with. Fissure veins are sometimes vertical, but more frequently dip at varying angles. They are thick at places, and at other places very thin, and fre- quently seem to disappear entirely, —nothing but a mere crack indicating their continuity, — to reappear again in the same line. They usually are more or less straight, but are frequently crooked. They are often broken and faulted, so that it is often difficult to recognize and state positively that the different portions belong to the same or the original vein. In fact, the breaking and the sub- sequent separation of parts of a fissure vein have given rise to some very interesting legal questions. Generally speaking, if one can positively identify the broken and detached portions of the vein beneath the surface, the owner of the upper portion, or that which outcrops, has a right to follow the portion of the vein which has been broken off, and removed some distance from the one which he has been working, provided the break has not removed it to an unconscionable distance. Of course, if faulting should make the vein have two outcrops, it would be unreasonable to give the owner of the highest outcrop the right to follow that portion of the vein which outcropped on the claim of his neigh- bor. (See explanatory diagram.) This is, however, a most unusual occurrence, and it is usually just as easy to identify por- tions of a vein as belonging to one original and continuous vein, as it is to identify and place together the different pieces of the so-called “glass snake” after it has been disjointed. If, on the other hand, there are several veins of much the same size, etc., in close proximity, and of much the same character, it rarely becomes difficult to identify the separated portions in it. Very fortunately, however, no two veins are exactly alike, and they usually present such different characteristics that their separated portions can be very easily identified. Moreover, it is unusual that there are two large or valuable veins in very close proximity to each other. civ THE LAW OF MINES AND MINING. The Effect of Faults on Fissure Veins. Dimensions or Thickness.— The size of a true fissure vein may vary from a fraction of an inch to in some cases as much as sev- eral hundred feet. The latter great deposits are often, though not always, more in the nature of contact deposits than true fis- sure veins. These contact deposits will be described in the next division. The usual size of veins, which are commonly worked for the valuable metals which they contain, vary from a few inches to forty or fifty feet; but it may be said that, generally speaking, they are less than twenty feet in width. They seldom maintain their thickness for any great distance, but are apt to get thin- ner and thicker as they are followed along their course, giving rise in some cases to roughly lenticular-shaped bodies of ore. Quality and Character of Contents. — Veins vary much in the quality and richness of their contents, and it often occurs that a number of metals are found more or less mixed together as they were deposited in the same vein; such as gold, copper, silver, iron, manganese, lead, zinc, antimony, bismuth, etc., most of which are usually combined with sulphur, at least in that por- tion of the vein which has not been subjected to surface influences which have caused this element to be totally or partially elimi- nated. It is only when one of these metals predominates, not in GEOLOGICAL PREFACE. cv quantity, but in commercial value, that a vein is called a gold, a copper, a silver vein, etc. On the other hand, it sometimes con- tains only one or perhaps two of these metals; but it is not neces- sary here to go into these vagaries of ore deposits. Of course the principal filling of the veins is the so-called gangue, which is usu- ally some reinstone, such as quartz, calcite or calc-spar, barite or heavy-spar, fluor-spar, etc., quartz being by far the more abun- dant. All we are concerned with is, as already said, the charac- ter, that is, the physical features, of the deposit in which the ore is contained, and not the kind of ore or valuable substance in the deposit. The ore in a vein is apt to vary considerably in quality, that is, in character, as well as in value, along the strike of the vein, or as the vein is followed along its course, and this fact is noticed either at the surface or at any depth below the surface. , a hy arti Poy 5 BT Dep Pa) an Smesenees. Occurrence of Copper in Michigan in Occurrence of Copper and other ores Conglomerate and Amygdaloidal along Contact between Limestone and Belt. Eruptive Rock. As to how nearly the characteristics of such a deposit must approach a true fissure or vein deposit in order to be considered as such from a legal point of view is very difficult to say ; but it may be said in a general way that they must always present the characteristic of continuity of ore or subsequently deposited mineral matter. This ore need not be rich, and indeed may be very poor, and the deposit for a long distance may be practically barren; but some subsequently deposited mineral or minerals must be proved to exist very continuously between the adjacent rocks before such a deposit can be classed in a mining or legal sense as a lode, and it is again suggested that the deposit must in itself represent some well defined old channel of mineralization through which the waters and vapors ascended with their load of mineral matter from the source from which they obtained it. The formations must not lie tight together and undisturbed upon each other for considerable distances; for this feature alone would be sufficient to bring the deposit within the class which will be next described. Again, there are some contact deposits next to eruptive rocks which are very difficult to classify, both in a mining and legal sense. For instance, a dike has come up through some pre- existing rock, and the ore has been subsequently deposited along GEOLOGICAL PREFACE. exiii the side of this dike or in the country rock close to it. It is always perfectly easy to follow along the wall of this dike, and one is rewarded by finding from time to time bunches of ore which in some cases are very rich. The dike may be only small, a foot or a few feet in thickness, or it may be perhaps a hundred feet in thickness. Now, if it can be shown that the dike itself is mineralized more or less continuously, although it may not in itself be pay ore, it would seem that such a deposit can be located as a lode or fissure vein deposit; and it is generally true that such deposits are so located, although it by no means follows that all such deposits should be regarded as true lodes. It is possible, however, in many cases to prove continuity, in that the dike itself frequently carries a small amount of mineral, or it is easy to find between the dike and the adjoining country a little stringer or thin deposit of ore, worthless in itself, but valuable in showing the continuity of the deposit. Often a vein (true fissure) will follow along a line of weakness produced by a pre-existing dike for some distance, then break away from it. This would be dis- tinctly of the former class, and is not now referred to. At other places there may be a large and very continuous body of ore following across country the contact of some eruptive rock —for instance, granite and porphyry — and some other rock, eruptive or sedimentary,—for instance, limestone. This ore may owe its origin in the first place to the eruption of the granite through the limestone, and afterward to the passage of mineral- ized waters between the contact of the eruptive and the sedimen- tary rock, along which contact they have ascended. These waters may have leached out great quantities of both rocks, but especially of the rock which would yield most readily to such influences, — as, for example, in this case of limestone,— and have deposited in its place, for long distances next to this contact, huge bodies of ore or mineralized matter. Such deposits could not be regarded in any other light than as a lode or vein, though having an origin in many features geologically different from it. In order to be so regarded, the simple rule with regard to deposits of this class is, that they must always show a very decided continuity of ore or mineral matter deposited subsequently to the intrusion of the erup- tive through the pre-existing and overlying rocks. Or in cases where there are no dikes or irregular intrusions of eruptive material, and the ore is found occupying a position between two h cxiv THE LAW OF MINES AND MINING. Common Examples of Contact Deposits. dissimilar formations, these must be very continuously divided by such ore or subsequently deposited mineral matter before the deposit or contact can be called in a legal sense a lode or a vein, and pos- sess the legal attributes of such. From what has been said, it is clear that all contact deposits cannot be regarded as lodes. In fact, a very large number of valuable mineral deposits should certainly not be so regarded, simply because of the marked lack of continuity of mineral matter which has been deposited subsequently to the formation of adja- cent rocks. This class will be treated of in the next division. There are other classes of ore deposits which deserve reference in passing; that is to say, those which are found in or around some neck of volcanic material which has welled up from below through any kind of rock composing the hard so-called “crust” at that particular locality. These may be regular or irregular contact deposits around the edge, or the central eruptive mass itself may have been shattered by volcanic forces, and true fissure veins thus established in it. These fissures in some cases may have been subsequently filled with dikes of other eruptive ma- terial, or in others with the solutions from hot waters ascending through them, and forming deposits of the valuable ores. These deposits usually give no trouble, and should be properly classified in the great majority of cases without difficulty. a a OP Cie G Ceo SS OT GOK LR Veen Saf OLN ig POISE ASS AKER SAAS, Contact deposits around Volcanic Contact deposits in Limestone underneath Neck. stratum of Shale —also isolated bunches of Ore in the Limestone. GEOLOGICAL PREFACE. CXV Another and quite rare class of deposits is where the hot waters have ascended through some more or less round or funnel-like opening somewhat after the manner of a geyser, and have filled this original vent with valuable ore. These more or less round chimneys of ore are rare, and in the great majority of cases can be proved to be only rich shoots of ore in an original crack or zone of fissuring having a more or less definite strike or trend across the country. In very few cases it is claimed that this is not the case, and that the ore deposit seems to be the filling of an ancient geyser vent, and that the deposit therefore, so far as it has been worked, represents actually an irregularly round chim- ney, having very little more extension in one direction than in another laterally, but being very continuous as it is worked down- ward, except perhaps where it may have been displaced by faults. This feature of regular continuity downward would, it is believed, be sufficient to bring this unusual class of deposit within the requirements of continuity which is so necessary in establishing what should be legally regarded as a lode, and what should not be so regarded. Some courts have, however, contended with much force that a deposit of valuable minerals should have, to a reasonable degree, both lateral and downward continuity to fall within the classification of true lodes, and to be located as such. B. Unstratiriep MINERAL DEPOSITS WHICH ARE IRREGULAR. Irregular unstratified deposits are those which, owing to their irregularity of occurrence, lack of continuity, and general pockety or “bunchy ” nature, cannot be regarded as lodes either in a geo- logical, mining, or legal sense. They are not stratified deposits, nor are they vein deposits, nor are they the continuous contact deposits of the nature mentioned in the last division. .Legally they are the most perplexing of all of our mineral deposits, espe- cially when it becomes a matter of serious importance, as is very often the case, to properly classify them. Any one familiar with mining law appreciates the vast impor- tance of being able to put these deposits in their proper class ; that is to say, being able to determine whether they may be prop- erly located as lode claims or as placer claims. As has been inti- mated heretofore, and as will be more fully described hereafter, the law relating to these two kinds of claims is in many particu- lars practically opposed; and one cannot be too careful to know CXxvi THE LAW OF MINES AND MINING. at the outset the nature of any mineral deposit which he may be working, or concerning which he may be asked to give advice. Contact Deposit or Vein Deposit Section of Comstock Lode (Phillips). between two Beds of Limestone. Of course when these deposits are upon other than government lands, or upon such lands where statutes grouping all classes of mineral deposits, irrespective of their geological differences, are in operation, their proper classification is of no legal importance. On the other hand, whenever they are situated in the larger por- tion of the western United States, it becomes of the utmost im- portance to recognize them, and accord them their proper place in the classification which the author has outlined and endeavored to make clear. (a.) Irregular Contact and other Deposits of Indefinite Shape and Continuity. The chief characteristic of this class of deposits is their so- called pockety nature. By this is meant the lack of continu- ity of ore or of the subsequently deposited mineral matter which contains it. They must always show the reverse of that continu- ity of mineralized matter which we have seen is so important in the two former classes. We have also seen that this mineral matter or gangue must have been deposited subsequently to the formation and consolidation of the rock in which it is found, and into which it must have worked its way owing to the operation of the agencies which have produced most of the deposits of valu- able metals. It is important always to remember, and especially here, that in the case of all deposits of metalliferous ores which have been described under the general head of “ Unstratified Mineral De- posits,” the ore is a stranger to the rocks in which it is found, and does not properly belong there, and must not be considered GEOLOGICAL PREFACE. exvil as a part of the country rock. This is a simple distinction, but should never be forgotten. Generally speaking, a metalliferous deposit, the nature of which is very unreliable and pockety, and which shows a marked lack of continuity with respect to the ore and to the subsequently deposited mineral matter carrying it, should not be regarded as a lode or vein deposit, and should not be so located. It is therefore clear that they should only be located wherever the United States statutes are in operation, as placer claims. As has been said, the deposits of ore of this class must be so irregular in shape, so discontinuous in nature, and so separate one from the other, as to be generally known by the mining term “pockety.” Perhaps it would be better to describe them as irregular and isolated bunches or nests of ore. These occur scattered through some particular stratum of rock, or following along some line of contact like the former class, Sometimes they spread out irregularly along lines of stratifica- tion, especially in the case of a limestone rock forming what are known among the lead miners as “flats.” These have certainly been produced by the replacement of a portion of the original rock by the ore which has found its way into it. No matter where found, the origin of these deposits presents, generally speaking, very little more difficulty than the lode or vein deposits which have been described. They have been due in the majority of cases to the same agencies, acting, however, much more irregularly, and for local reasons which can in many cases be easily deter- mined. As in the former class of deposits, the mineral-laden waters came from unknown depths with their load of mineral matter in solution. Being hot and under great pressure, they of course endeavored to find an outlet upward. These outlets were usually found through the cracks and joints in the rocks. Wherever the conditions were suitable — and what these were is not at all well understood, except in a general way— and especially where these waters were checked or retarded in their upward progress, it is found that they would deposit their load of mineral matter, often dissolving out portions of the rock through which they passed in order to do so, effecting the process of replacement already described. Thus, there is often seen, as in the zinc regions of Missouri or the Rocky Mountains, masses of the original coun- try rock which have escaped replacement, entirely surrounded by deposits of this kind. exvili THE LAW OF MINES AND MINING. Pap ee re co YT ae Darr reer Td aa af Ls el es ra Irregular Occurrence of Lead Ore in Deposits of Ore along the sides of a Dike Limestone. (Whitney). It is often found that these waters have been checked in their progress by some impervious stratum which is generally sili- cious or otherwise insoluble in character, rather than calcareous or otherwise soluble. Where the strata are lying more or less horizontal, that is, one upon the other, we find that many val- uable mineral deposits were formed in scattered bunches or nests immediately underneath such a stratum, the chemical and physical conditions not being favorable to the further ascent of the mineral-laden waters. This simply means that as these waters came up from whatever inferior sources from which they may have obtained their load of mineral matter, they abutted against this stratum, and failing to go through it, or being checked in their further upward progress, they were forced to deposit their mineral matter at this point. Therefore one can follow along or underneath this contact—as in the case of a stratum of shale resting on limestone, or often porphyry resting on limestone — for a long distance, and find that the formations rest tightly one upon the other, with the contact well defined, but marked by no intervening ore or other mineral matter deposited at the same time with the ore. Then suddenly he will come into a large pocket or absolutely isolated body of ore which has usually spread out underneath the overlying silicious stratum, mushroom-like, although the waters producing it may have come up through the little joints, cracks, or seams in the rock immedi ately underlying the isolated deposit. By following the so-called “gontact” he may find a number of such isolated and discon- nected deposits. Or sometimes cases are met with, especially if these formations have been tilted, where the mineralized waters, when reaching this contact, have chosen it as the easiest path of escape, and worked their way up through it or along GEOLOGICAL PREFACE. exix it very irregularly, being always prevented from ascending verti- cally by the insoluble stratum above. In this way they have left untouched and unaltered some portions of the contact while they have deposited their solutions at others, giving rise to very irreg- ular and apparently unconnected deposits. Diagram showing how Ore has collected Underneath Porphyry in the Upper part of a bed of Limestone (Emmons). Again, sometimes valuable deposits of ore are found irregularly distributed along or near the top of anticlinal folds in stratified rocks, where these folds exist in regions, which have not only been subjected to enormous pressure causing the folds, but which have been shattered and penetrated by deep-reaching fissures. The reason is obvious, for, from the foregoing, it is readily seen that they are apt to occur there, if the other conditions are favorable ; namely, solubility of an underlying and imperviousness of an over- lying stratum, which are affected by the other causes productive of ore deposition. There is a striking physical similarity in the reasons, which have caused these deposits to be formed in such places, and those which have caused oil and natural gas to collect along the crests of anticlinals. (See page Ixxiv.) Gy C ay Yo gon WSS 7 VY off) ay TeEEY Vins SS SX Y KEE x a g \ YX Deposit of Ore in the Crest of an Irregular Deposits along a line Anticlinal Fold. of Fracture, with Offshoots. Now these deposits are manifestly different from those which have been described, and should not be confounded with them, although this is frequently done. Naturally it is to the interest of the one owning a claim upon the outcrop of a contact between these two formations —that is, controlling its apex — to have it Cxx THE LAW OF MINES AND MINING. regarded as a vein or lode deposit, since by following the contact downward for a long distance he is quite certain to come into a number of these pockets of ore, although he may have no other guide than the contact itself. But it is manifestly improper that he should have this right where the deposits of ore are in them- selves discontinuous in nature, and the formations are often found resting tightly upon each other with no intervening mineral mat- ter. Of course the element of reasonableness must enter into all of these statements, but what has been said is applicable generally in all cases, and accurately in the great majority. (b.) Lrregular Pockets in Limestone or other Soluble Rock. More or less similar to the foregoing are the deposits which are so frequently seen and abundantly worked; namely, irregular but often large masses or bunches of ore in any kind of rock, usually in limestone. It should be said that limestone, of all other rocks, furnishes the most perfect conditions for the formation of this class of indefinite, pockety deposits, for the simple reason that owing to its calcareous nature it offers little resistance to the dissolving influences of hot mineral-laden waters. Some eruptives, as has been pointed out, have the same characteristic, but not to the same degree. Limestone is also supposed to have exerted a beneficial influence upon the deposition of certain solutions con- tained in these waters, causing them to drop their previous load of mineral matter when taking the limestone into solution. Many of the lead and zinc deposits of the Mississippi Valley are of this description, and one who is familiar with these deposits in Kansas and Missouri cannot have a better type of the class which is now being described. These deposits are extremely irregular in shape and of varying size, but are often connected by one or more little stringers of ore, marking the path followed by the waters which deposited the ore in its present position. Fre- quently they are entirely disconnected and scattered over a wide area; but so far as it is possible to judge of any geological pheno- menon, it ts certain that they were not deposited in the limestone bed when it was formed. On the contrary, they were deposited in their present position, having derived their mineral matter from some inferior source, long after the formation and: consolidation of the limestone. It can be shown, however, that this usually occurred where the limestone shows evidence of having been pre- GEOLOGICAL PREFACE. Cxxi viously broken or shattered to a greater or less extent, the cracks having permitted the ascent of the mineral-laden waters; and the same may be said of the next class of deposits. In some cases it is not improbable that some original overlying insoluble stratum may have assisted in the formation, as in the last class men- tioned, of these bodies of ore, though at the place where these deposits are worked it is now absent, having been carried off by erosion. Lamy 3 Kid JS I) GAY) CT ip we,’ UN AV S CA aS qe See Ly gi hyiy STOPS VYYyy A 4 Ke Mp Vy Ys ZL Irregular and Isolated Pockets of Ore in Fissure Vein and Irregular Offshoots and shattered Limestone. Pockets in a Soluble Eruptive rock. In this class of deposits, as in the former, there is always such a marked lack of continuity of ore or of secondarily deposited mineral matter that it is clear that they should not be regarded as lodes, and therefore should not be located as such, but as placers, when found upon government lands. Some valuable deposits of this class are worked for the silver they contain in the western and southwestern portions of the United States. There- fore, if the author is right in the above construction, it becomes of very considerable importance to recognize and to properly classify them. (c.) Stockwork. The deposits known by this name are simply a network of small veins, crossing each other at all angles, and being always found in a rock which has certainly been very much shattered and broken before the mineral matter found its way to its present position. Sometimes this extends over very considerable portions of the rock in question, or it may extend into the adjacent rocks. Such a condition is quite frequently met with in connection with the two previous classes, but usually it is distinct from them. Their origin is much the same, for the ascending metalliferous waters have simply travelled along these lines of fracture and Cxxii THE LAW OF MINES AND MINING. deposited their solutions wherever the conditions were favorable. Often gold, tin, and platinum, but other metals as well, are found in deposits of this description. These cracks are also often filled with material derived from the adjacent rock, such as quartz, calcite, feldspar, or asbestos (in serpentine), etc., according to the chemical nature of these rocks, by a process of leaching and segregation. Deposits of this class are extremely unreliable and pockety, and while in one sense continuous, in another are just the reverse, because no particular seam can be followed for any distance. For instance, one crack or seam will soon give place to another traversing it, and so on ad infinitum. A whole stratum, or more frequently certain disconnected, isolated portions of a stratum, such, for instance, as quartzite, is frequently found containing great numbers of these little seams traversing it in every direc- tion, the majority of which contain more or less ore or mineral matter accompanying it, and deposited with it through the same agencies. Now it would be manifestly improper to call this kind of deposit a vein or lode, unless, indeed, the stratum of rock con- taining these seams should be reasonably thin and continuously mineralized for a considerable distance, and be thus made to possess the chief distinguishing features of a true lode. It would also be improper to call it a regular or irregular contact deposit ; so, necessarily, when ore is found to occur in this way it should be regarded as a type of deposit different from any of the foregoing. Stockwork Deposits or Deposits of Ore in the Joints and Seams of a highly shattered rock. In the great majority of cases, from what has been said, it is clear that such stockwork deposits, when they are very irreg- ularly scattered through the general mass of the rock forming the stratum or strata, cannot properly be located as vein or lode deposits ; nor can the whole stratum in this case be so located, but GEOLOGICAL PREFACE. exxili they should be located when upon government lands as placer deposits, for much the same reasons as the decidedly isolated, irregular, discontinuous, and pockety deposits heretofore described should be so located. To enable any deposit of valuable ores or other mineral sub- stances to be located as a lode claim, or, more accurately, to possess all the legal attributes of a true lode, there must always, in the opinion of the author, be shown to exist a reasonable con- tinuity of ore, or the accompanying mineral matter (gangue) presumably formed at the same time and by much the same agencies as the ore, both occupying, as has been seen, some rea- sonably well defined main channel of mineralization, or there should at least be, in the judgment of trained and educated mining men of practical experience, a reasonable expectation of such continuity of ore. If this continuity and regularity cannot be shown to exist, and the expectation of it can be shown to be unreasonable, the deposit, in his opinion, should be located as a placer claim, and the laws governing this class of claims should apply. D. M. BARRINGER. PHILADELPHIA, September, 1897. CXxiv THE LAW OF MINES AND MINING. The following is a legal, but not a geological or mineralogical, classification : — I. A. REGULAR. (a.) Non-metallic. Coal, fire clay, asphalt, salt, gypsum, alum, potash, graphite, infusorial earth, quarries of strati- fied rocks, Chile nitrate, etc. (b.) Metallic. Iron, manganese, aluminum, gold, tin, and platinum gravels. B. Irrecurar. (a.) Non-metallic. Asphalt, petroleum, natural gas, alum, bauxite, borax, potash, phosphate rock, guano, quarries of rocks not sedimentary, mineral paints, sulphur, ete. (b.) Metallic. Iron, manganese, aluminum. , UNSTRATIFIED MINERAL DEPOSITS. II. A. REGULAR. (a.) Fissure Veins or True Lodes. (See page ciii.) (b.) Regular or Continuous Contact Deposits. (See page cxi.) B. IRREGULAR. (a.) Discontinuous Contact Deposits. (See page cxvi.) (b.) Lsolated Deposits in Limestone, etc., also Terminable Spurs or Off-shoots from Lodes. (See pages cx and cxx.) (c.) Stockwork (possible exceptions). (See page cxxi.) STRATIFIED MINERAL DEPOSITS. } J 5 4 in Should be properly lo- cated when on govern- ment lands according to statutes governing the particular kind of de- posit; or generally, in + the absence of such, or when not found in true fissure veins or as regu- lar contact deposits, as Placer Claims, and the law governing this class of deposits should apply. Should be located as Lode Claims, and the law governing this class of deposits should apply. 6 Should be located as | Placer Claims, and the law governing this class of deposits should apply. The above classification, for the sake of clearness, hag been carried out a little further than appears in the text. GEOLOGICAL PREFACE. CXXV A List or THE More Important MINERALS AND METALS WHICH Possess COMMERCIAL VALUE. Non-metallic. Alum. Iodine. Anthracite Coal. Lignite Coal. Asbestos. Limestone. Asphalt. Magnesite or Dolomite. Barytes. Marls. Bauxite. Mica. Bituminous Coal. Mineral Paints. Borax. Mineral Waters. Bromine. Monazite. Building Stone. Natural Gas. Cale-spar. Nitrate of Soda. Cement. Ozocerite. Chromic Iron Ore. Petroleum. Clay, Deposits (Fire Clay, | Phosphate Rock. Brick Clay, ete.). Potash. Coal. Precious Stones. Corundum (Emery). Pyrites. Feldspar. Rutile. Flint. Salt. Fuller’s Earth. Silica or Quartz. Fluor-spar. Soapstone. Graphite. Sulphur. Gypsum. Tale. Infusorial Earth. Metallic. Aluminum, Lead. Antimony. Manganese. Arsenic. Mercury. Bismuth. Nickel. Chromium. Platinum. Cobalt. Silver. Copper. Tin. Gold. Tungsten. Tron. Zine. THE LAW OF MINES AND MINING IN THE UNITED STATES. THE LAW OF MINES AND MINING IN THE UNITED STATES. CHAPTER I. PROPERTY IN MINERALS WHERE THERE HAS BEEN NO DIVI- SION BETWEEN THE OWNERSHIP OF THE SURFACE AND THE MINERAL ESTATE. I. Property and Rights of the Owner B. Tenants for Years. of the Soil in Minerals which are C. Owners of Equities of Redemp- in Place. tion. II. Property in Minerals which have | IV. Property and Rights in the Minerals been severed from the Freehold. where there are Joint Owners of III. Property and Rights in the Minerals the Soil. of Owners of the Soil who havea] V. Property and Rights in Mineral Oil Limited Estate. and Natural Gas. A. Tenants for Life. THE maxim of the common law is cujus est solum ejus est usque ad celum, and by the common law the owner of the soil has the property in the minerals lying under it, and between planes pass- ing through the centre of the earth and the boundaries of the surface. While in place and unworked, minerals are part of the freehold, and, as such, real estate. When separated from the freehold they become personalty. Minerals in the ground are, however, capable of severance or separation in ownership from the soil, and when so severed are independently and sep- arately inheritable and capable of conveyance. This subject of property in minerals when they are of a different estate from the soil will be discussed in the next chapter. The present chap- ter treats only of minerals in land in which there has been no division of the estate, whereby the title to the minerals either beneath or on the surface has become vested in some one who is not the owner of the soil. 4 THE LAW OF MINES AND MINING. J. Property AND RIGHTS OF THE OWNER OF THE SOIL IN MINERALS WHICH ARE IN PLACE. Minerals in place, or undisturbed in the position where they have been deposited by the agencies of nature, are a part of the land and belong to the owner of the soil.1 Adam v. Briggs Tron Co., 7 Cush. 361 (1851). Massachusetts. 4. 9; img, facie the owner of freehold lands is en- titled to all the minerals and strata of coal, clay, or ore, lime, marble, and the like, not as a separate estate, but as a part of the fee and inheritance, and they will pass by descent or by conveyance without special designation.” : New York Lacustrine Fertilizer Co. v. Lake Guano and Ferti- ’ lizer Co., 82, 476 (1880). The agents of the State, in digging a canal through certain land, dug up and deposited in piles on the banks, certain marl. This was, both after and before the dig- ging, a part of the freehold and the property of the owner in fee. (See p. 6.) Paunagiyan ia, Duff’s Ap., 21 W. N.C. 491 (1888). The owner * of a tract of land has the right to remove and convert into money for his own use the timber growing upon the surface and the minerals underlying it. Stratton v. Lyon, 58, 641 (1881). General possession of the surface of the close in which a clay pit is situated would include the surface of the clay pit; and whoever is in posses- sion of the surface of the soil is in law deemed to be in possession of all that lies underneath the surface. Vermont. 1 The expression “in place ” (in situ) has reference to the condition of the min- eral deposit when it forms a part of the nature; namely, by the decay and erosion or washing down of the rocks containing the gold-bearing veins. The veins or solid rocky crust of the earth, and occu- pies the position therein where it was placed ages ago by the operation of natu- ral agencies.’ Thus the expression is often used of a ledge, lode, or vein, or any description of ore body; while, on the other hand, fragments which have become detached from these, and which have most commonly rolled or have been carried by other natural agencies some distance from their source, are referred to as “float.” Thus the gold in a placer claim, which is usually a gravel deposit, admixed with other detrital material, in an old or present river bed, is not strictly in place, though it is true that it has been deposited in this manner by the forces of lodes, however, from which these frag- mental particles were derived, when found forming a part of the solid rocky mass which underlies all soil, are properly said to be in place. So also the term is prop- erly applied to strata of coal, limestone, iron ore, etc., which belong to the owner of the soil when there has been no sever- ance of the estates. But as is seen from the statement in the text, the owner of the soil is entitled to all valuable mineral substances which have been deposited upon his land through the agency of natural forces alone, although they may be mere float, and their original source may have been outside the limits of his property. PROPERTY IN MINERALS. 5 Il. Property iN MINERALS WHICH HAVE BEEN SEVERED FROM THE FREEHOLD. Upon severance from the earth, minerals become personal prop- erty, and are dealt with by the law as personalty. This sever- ance must be accomplished by artificial means, the object of which is to separate the minerals, and must not be the mere result of natural causes. In the latter case, as we have seen, the minerals still remain a part of the freehold. So also do they when the severance is the incidental result of excavation for a purpose entirely distinct from the extraction of minerals, when they are allowed to remain mixed with the mass of the soil. Mineral, when unextracted, being part of the realty, the taking of mineral from the land of another is not larceny but merely a trespass, where the taking and carrying away are so closely con- nected as to constitute one and the same continuous act. But where after the severance the mineral is left upon the property of its owner, however short a time, before it is carried away, or if another well-defined act intervenes between the severance and the asportation, the latter is not to be considered as a continuation of the trespass, but, if the act is done animo furandi, is larceny. Forbes v. Gracey, 94, 762 (1876). Although the title to. mineral lands may remain in the United States, the ores, when dug or detached from the lands under a mining claim, are free from any lien, claim, or title of the United States, and, be- coming personal property, the ownership of which is in the man whose labor, capital, and skill has discovered and developed the mine and extracted the ore or other mineral product, are, as such, subject to State taxation in like manner as other personal property. People v. Williams, 35, 671 (1868). To sever gold-bear- ing quartz rock from the land of another and carry it away is not larceny but merely trespass. An indictment charging defendant with unlawfully and feloniously taking, stealing, and conveying away from the mining claim of B. forty-two pounds of gold-bearing quartz rock, the personal property of B., of the value of $400, will not sup- port a conviction of larceny. Leport v. Mining Co., 3 N. J. L. J. 280 (1880), Cir. Ct. s between mortgagor and mortgagee ore taken out of the earth for the purpose of being removed and sold, and remaining on the premises, is personal property. United States. California. New Jersey. A 1 See further on the subject of severance III. and IV., for title in minerals mined from the freehold, Chap. XIV., Div. IV., under incorporeal rights and licenses ; and as to property in refuse; Chap. II., Divs. Chap. XXIL, as to trespass and larceny. 6 THE LAW OF MINES AND MINING. New York, , lacustrine Fertilizer Co. v. Lake Guano and Fertilizer " €o., 82, 476 (1880). Marl which has been thrown upon the banks of a canal built by the State, having been dug out of its bed, is a part of the realty without regard to the question whether or not the State acquired title before cutting the canal. The owner of land cannot, as a general rule, by agreement with another make that which is a part of the realty personal property, as against a subsequent purchaser for value with notice, there having been no actual severance made. State v. Burt, 64, 619 (1870). A nugget of gold found upon a loose pile of rocks savors of the realty, and is not a subject of larceny. ‘‘ Nuggets of gold are lumps of native metal, and are often found separated from the original veins; when this separation is produced by natural causes, there is no severance from the realty, but such nugget will pass under a conveyance like ores and minerals which are embedded in the earth. When ores and min- erals are taken out of mines with expense, labor, and skill, to be con- verted into metals, or used for the purpose of trade and commerce, they become personal property, and are under the protection of the criminal law.” Brown v. Morris, 83, 251 (1880). A contract by which one made bricks on the land of another, the property in the bricks to remain in the owner of the soil until he had been paid for his clay and wood used in their manufacture, is not within the Statute of Frauds. The bricks were personalty, and the contract was concerning personalty. Watts v. Tibbals, 6, 447 (1847). A. entered into con- tract with B., by which the latter was permitted to dig, raise, and remove stone from A.’s quarry for certain locks in a canal, the quantity to be ascertained by measurement in the locks, and payment to be made as soon as and as often as payments were made to the con- tractors on the canal. The stone having been quarried, and being at the mouth of the quarry, B. has a property in it; and having been levied upon and sold by the sheriff under an execution against B., the purchaser takes a good title. Rhoades v. Patrick, 27, 323 (1856). It was set up as a defence to an action on a note given for stone quarried on land occupied by the plain- tiff, and sold and delivered by her to the defendant, that the plaintiff did not own the land, and that as the title to the land was in question, the justice of the peace had no jurisdiction of the action. Held, that the stones were personal property when sold, and the title of plaintiff to the land was not in question. Lyon v. Gormley, 53, 261 (1866). Coal which has been purposely and lawfully severed from the freehold in the construction of a lateral railway under act of May 5, 1832, becomes at once personalty for which the owner of the land may maintain trover. (See this case under Chap. V., Div. IV.) Green v. Ashland Iron Co., 62, 97 (1869). Plaintiffs under a min- ing lease raised iron ore which, being unwashed, and having earth clinging to it, was left on the bank to dry. This was the usual course of business in mining iron ore, and the landlord making no claim to retain the earth, replevin lay for the unwashed ore. North Carolina. Pennsylvania. PROPERTY IN MINERALS. 7 Lykens Valley Coal Co. v. Dock, 62, 232 (1869). Coal as soon as mined becomes personal property. The lessee of coal mines made an assignment for the benefit of creditors, after which the lessor re-entered. The assignee was entitled to coal already mined lying in the mines, provided it could be removed without injury to the mine ; and he could maintain trover therefor. / Commonwealth v. Steimling, 156, 400 (1893). One who severs coal from the freehold, animo furandi, and after screening and loading it upon a boat on the owner’s land carries it away, is guilty of larceny. The act of carrying away may be separated from the act of severance, and is not to be considered as one.and the same continuous act,— a mere trespass. Noble v. Sylvester, 42, 146 (1869). A stone split out and removed from its original connection and position in the ledge, and laid up for the purpose and with the intention by the owner of the farm upon which it was quarried and left, of using it in the construction of a tomb elsewhere, would not pass by a deed of the farm. It would be governed by the same principles that are applicable to timber, fence rails, and the like, that were severed from the freehold. If intended for use on the farm, they pass by the deed in a sale of it ; if to be used elsewhere, they do not pass. As there was nothing about the stone or its position to indicate the use to which it was to be put, this was a proper subject of explanation between the seller and purchaser at the time the deed was executed, and such explanation, though accompanied by a former parol exception of the stone, which was unnecessary, might well be by parol. It was not error to admit proof of the parol exception. Vermont. Ill. Property anp RIGHTS IN THE MINERALS OF OWNERS OF THE SOIL WHO HAVE A Limited Estate, A. Tenants for Life. B. Tenants for Years. C. Owners of Equities of Redemption. Minerals are of such a nature that the enjoyment of the owner- ship of them consists in their consumption, or more accurately, in taking them away from the land, and to this extent devastat- ing it. It follows that, while the owner of the estate in fee, as owner also of the minerals, may remove them and thus impoverish the land, those who hold an estate less than a fee in the land are subject to certain limitations created for the protection of the owners of the executory or reversionary estates. The general principle is that the produce of mines already opened and pre- viously worked is considered to be temporary profits of the land, while all other minerals are an essential part of the land itself, whose extraction is waste. 8 THE LAW OF MINES AND MINING. A. Tenants for Life. A tenant for life, however the tenancy may have been created, may work mines of all sorts which were already opened before the commencement of the tenancy; but it is waste for a tenant for life to open new mines.? The open mines he may work even to exhaustion. He may also sink new shafts or wells to the same vein, and it has been held in an early case in Virginia that he may penetrate through the seam already opened and dig into another below it. The mining, however, must not be carried on unskilfully so as to do injury to the inheritance. This right to work open .mines carries with it the right to take from the land timber for use in the operations. A mine ceases to be an open mine when it has been abandoned before the commencement of the particular estate with an executed intention to devote the land to some other use, but mere cessation of work does not constitute abandonment. In order to constitute an open mine, the opening must be upon the land which is the subject of the estate. Openings upon the vein on adjoining land will not give the right of working it. In Michigan, however, the general principle is not applied to a case of statutory dower where the land is of no value except for its minerals, and in such a case the widow is entitled to her share of the royalty of mines opened subsequently to her husband’s death. It follows from the general principle that when a life estate is created in lands which have been previously leased for mining purposes, the rent or royalty thereof belongs to the life tenant as income. Also where mineral lands are conveyed by will or deed to a trustee with power to lease the minerals (or what includes them, the real estate) and pay the income to the cestui que trust for life with a remainder over, the rent or royalty derived from such leasing is income which goes to the life tenant. The real ground of this is the intention of the testator or grantor, but the cases are brought into line with the foregoing principle by the fiction that the power to lease amounts to an opening of the mines by the testator or grantor. 1 In Hollinshead v. Allen, 17 Pa, 275, it of stone in Griffin v. Fellows, 814 Pa. was said that the mining of a deposit of 114. In any event the tenant committing sand, though technically waste, would not such waste is liable to account to the work a forfeiture, while the contrary was reversioner. said of the mining of coal and quarrying PROPERTY IN MINERALS. 9 Black v. Elkhorn Min. Co., 163, 445 (1896). A mere locator of a mining claim, owning only the pos- sessory right conferred by the statute, has no such estate in the prop- erty as against the United States or its grantee, as that the right of dower can be predicated thereon by virtue of any State legislation. Locator having conveyed without the joinder of his wife to another who obtained patent, the wife was held to have no dower. Lenfers v. Henke, 73, 405 (1874). A widow may work mines on the land in which she has dower, that have been opened between her husband’s death and the assignment of dower. Priddy v. Griffith, 150, 560 (1894). Baker, J. ‘‘It is a well- established rule of law that the person occupying land as dower can- not commit waste upon such land, and that the opening of coal and other mines thereon amounts to waste. But it is equally well settled in this State that where mines are already opened upon land assigned as dower, the widow has a right to operate the same and receive the proceeds thereof. It is true in this case the mines have not been actually opened upon the land assigned as dower, but there being a valid subsisting contract, executed by. the husband in his lifetime, under which the lessees may at any time open the mines, and by the terms of which one dollar per acre rent or royalty is to be paid an- nually to the lessor, his heirs or other legal representatives, who at the time shall be legally entitled to the life estate in, or fee simple title to the land, until the mines are opened and certain fixed royalties after the mines are opened and worked, it seems clear to us that in justice the widow is entitled to the rent or royalty after the assignment of her dower. Should the lessees open mines on the lands assigned as. dower, as by the terms of the lease they may, without the consent of the widow, she certainly would be entitled to the royalty named in the lease. The act of opening the mine would, in such case, be practically the act of the husband, viz. authorized by him. ‘¢Then, in contemplation of law, for the purposes of this case, the mine may be treated as already opened when the widow’s right of dower attached.” To rent or royalty accrued before the assignment she would not be entitled. Hendri« v. McBeth, 61, 473, (1878). The owner of coal lands having leased them for the purpose of mining the coal on royalty for twenty years, died, and his widow elected to take against his will. Held, she was entitled to one-third of the royalties received from the lease. Widow may work open mines on lands assigned her as dower. Moore v. Rollins, 45, 493 (1858). A widow is entitled to dower in a lime quarry of which her husband died seized of an estate of inheritance, if the same had been opened and worked dur- ing coverture. Maryland. Franklin Coal Co. v. McMillan, 49, 549 (1878). Where strangers have dug and carried away minerals from land in the possession of a life tenant, upon which no openings or mines had been made in the lifetime of the grantor, the remainder-men may maintain trespass therefor. Massachusetts. Béllings v. Taylor, 10 Pick. 460 (1830). This was a claim of dower in aslate quarry. It appeared that a tract of about four acres, lying together, contained the slate quarry, United States. Illinois. Indiana. Maine. 10 THE LAW OF MINES AND MINING. about a quarter of an acre of which had been dug over. The stone lay partly above and the residue immediately under the surface, and in going down the quality improved. The practice had been to take a section of ten or twelve feet square, and go down to the usual depth, and then begin on the surface again. It was claimed that the widow was entitled to dower only in the part of the tract actually opened. Shaw, C. J. ‘*‘ We think it would be too narrow a construction to say that no part of this quarry was opened except that a portion had been actually dug; but it must be considered that the whole, lying together as one tract, belonging to one estate, and wrought in the manner described, was opened, and, therefore, that the widow was entitled to dower in that as well as the other estate, of which her hus- band had been seized during the coverture.” . Michiean Seager v. McCabe, 92, 186 (1892). S. died in 1883 and a". eft a tract of forty acres valueless except for iron ore. Be- fore his death he had conveyed eighty acres adjoining, reserving the mines and minerals. No mine had been opened on either tract. In 1888 leases were made of the mining rights by the guardians of S.’s children under leave of court. Held, S.’s widow was entitled to one- third of the royalty received. ‘« The strict rules of the common law of England respecting waste and the rights of tenants for life do not obtain here. . . . It is not use, but abuse, that is waste. Waste must be consumption, nor is consumption always waste. . . . Our statute respecting ‘dower’ de- fines it as the use for life of one-third of all the lands of which the hus- band was seized during the marriage relation. ‘ Dower’ is defined by the English authorities as the provision which the law makes for a widow out of the lands or tenements of her husband for her support and the nurture of her children. Co. Litt. 830 b; 2 Bl. Com. 130. The rules applicable to a country where landed estates are large and diversified, where the laws of inheritance are exclusive, where the theory of dower is subsistence merely, and where there is a strong dis- position to free estates from even that charge, do not obtain in a ‘commonwealth like ours where estates are small and the policy of our laws is to distribute them with each generation, where dower is one of the positive institutions of the State, founded in policy, and the provision for the widow is a part of the law of distribution, and the aim of the statute is not subsistence alone but provision commensurate with the estate. ‘¢Jn the present case the grant is by operation of the statute giving the use of all the lands of which the husband was seized. The grant must be held to include the use of these lands, irrespective of whether mines were opened upon them before or after the husband’s death. ‘The question here is not the impairment of one mode of enjoyment or ‘source of profit to reach another. There is but one mode of enjoy- ment of the land in question, but one source of revenue or profit. The land is susceptible of but one use.” Rockwell v. Morgan, 2 Beas. Ch. 389 (1861). ‘* The widow is entitled to dower in the clay banks as well ag in any other part of the inheritance. Dower is assignable in mines, quarries, and in whatever is part of and appurtenant to the New Jersey. PROPERTY IN MINERALS. 11 Jand of which woman hath dower, and that whether it. be assignable by metes and bounds or not. *¢The only question that can arise will be in regard to the mode of assignment, whether by metes and bounds or by a share of the profits. That course will be adopted which will be most favorable to the widow, and which will most effectually secure the enjoyment of her vight. There can be no difficulty in taking an account of the profit. It appears from the answer that the clay banks have been worked in connection with the farm, and the profits of the clay may be ascer- tained as well as of any other part of the property. Working banks is a mere mode of enjoyment.” : Reed v. Reed, 16 Eq. 248 (1863). Tenants for life may work a sand pit which has been opened and used by the former owner. The principle is stated as applying to ‘* mine, quarry, clay pit or sand pit.” Gaines v. Mining Co., 33 Eq. 603, reversing s. c. 832 Eq. 86 (1881). The life tenant has a right to mine for his own profit, where the owner of the fee in his lifetime opened mines, even though he may have discontinued work upon them for a long period of years. A mere cessation of work, for however long a period, will not defeat the life tenant’s rights; but an abandonment for a day, with an executed intention to devote the land to some other use, will be fatal to those rights. ee York. Coates v. Cheever, 1 Cowen, 460 (1823). If during the husband’s lifetime mines are opened, dower in them is properly assignable. Otherwise, if not opened in his lifetime, the opening of mines by tenant by dower is waste. The admeasurers should take into consideration the value of mines so far as opened during the husband’s life, and they may, in their discretion, assign the dower in land by metes and bounds containing mines or not, by direct- ing separate alternate enjoyment of the whole for periods proportioned to shares of the parties, or by giving the widow part of the profits. But they must not take into account the portion of the mines opened since the death of the husband by his alienee, nor the improvements made therein by the said alienee. Ohio Raynolds v. Hanna, 55 Fed. 783 (1893), C. C. E. D. Ohio. ’ By the terms of a contract the first party ‘‘ grants” to the second ‘‘ the exclusive right, license, and permission to enter upon the mine and remove the coal” from described premises, together with surface and timber rights, in consideration whereof the second party agrees to mine coal, and to take out and pay a royalty on a certain minimum amount annually, and to continue until all the coal that could be practically mined had been so mined and paid for. Rights of inspection are given to the first party, and a right of forfeiture for non-payment of royalty, and of re-entry and possession. A right of forfeiture was also given for breach of other covenants, and the sec- ond party agreed to ‘‘make no sale, transfer, or assignment of its rights under the agreement, nor to sublet any portion of the demised premises, without the written consent of the first party, any such sale, etc., to be null and void.” This agreement was held to be ‘clearly, in its legal effect and meaning, a lease.” Such a lease was made by executors under a 12 THE LAW OF MINES AND MINING. power conferred upon them by will. The money received therefrom was income, distributable as such, and not as a part of the corpus of the estate. Where the chief, if not sole value of lands is for coal-mining pur- poses, and the only profit to be derived therefrom is by sale or lease of the coal, either of which the executor in his discretion has power to do, the fact that the coal mines were not opened in the life of the testator does not affect the authority of the executor to lease the same, so as to make the rental thereof income of the estate. Hollinshead v. Allen, 17, 275 (1851). Rogers, J., at Nisi Prius, charged that if a tenant for life dis- covered and mined a deposit of sand, though technically waste, it would not work a forfeiture, and did not come within the operation. of the Statute of Gloucester, but tenant for life must account to the tenant in fee for the profits.? Neel v. Neel, 19, 323 (1852). It is not waste for a tenant for life to work mines already opened on the land. This rule applies to all tenants for life, however the tenancy may have been created, and to all sorts of mines. It seems that a court of equity cannot undertake to determine what is an unreasonable use of a mine by a tenant for life, or restrain the same. The tenant for life may also take timber from the land for use in his mining operations. frwin v. Covode, 24, 162 (1854). The working of open mines by a tenant for life or his alienee is not waste, either at common law or by statute. Nor is it waste to open a new drift to mines already open. The court by virtue of common-law powers might restrain unskilful mining and wanton injury to the inheritance, but not such proper mining as is subject to no other objection than its liability to exhaust the mine. It is possible that chancery would afford relief by account between tenant for life and remainder-man, but it is clear that estrepe- ment is not the remedy. Lynn’s Appeal, 31, 44 (1857). Tenant for life or his assignee has aright to work mines or quarries opened upon the land before the commencement of the life estate. To do so is not waste. Westmoreland Co.’s Ap., 85, 344 (1877). Itis not waste for a ten- ant for life to work open mines. When not precluded by restraining words, he may work them to exhaustion. The term ‘‘ mine” when applied to coal is generally equivalent to a worked vein. And when opened, the tenant for life may pursue that vein to the boundaries of the tract. A tenant for life may not take coal from under the tract in which he has the life estate, when there has been no opening in that tract to the vein, by means of an opening made on other lands of the life tenant under which the same vein runs. Eley’s Ap., 103, 300 (1883). Testator divided his estate into ten parts, seven of which were bequeathed absolutely; the remaining three were left in trust for three children for life, with remainders over. The will authorized the executors to sell the real estate ‘‘or to lease the coal upon or under the same,” provided the consent of the owners of six-tenths of the premises was first obtained. With such consent the executors leased all the coal for an indefinite period at a royalty. 1 See Griffin v. Fellow, 81} Pa. 114, p. 17. Pennsylvania. PROPERTY IN MINERALS. 13 The rents accruing from this lease were ‘‘ income” within the mean- ing of the will, and as such payable to the life tenants. The power given to the executors, subject to the consent of the owners of six- tenths, gave the life tenants the same rights over unopened mines as if they had been opened and worked in testator’s lifetime. Wentz’s Ap., 106, 301 (1884). Testator directed that his execu- tors should ‘collect and pay all the income arising from my estate, both real and personal, to my wife during the period of her life,” with remainder over. The executors were given power to sell certain real estate, which was only valuable as coal land, and directed to exer- cise their own judgment as to the propriety of leasing or selling said estate. The executors leased the coal upon this land which had never been worked during the life of testator. ‘This was held to be an exercise of the power of lease, and not that of sale, and the rental therefrom went to the life tenant as income. McClintock v. Dana, 106, 386 (1884).