Stewart Mining Company v. Ontario Mining Company
Decision Date | 26 April 1915 |
Docket Number | No. 205,205 |
Citation | 59 L.Ed. 989,237 U.S. 350,35 S.Ct. 610 |
Parties | STEWART MINING COMPANY, Plff. in Err., v. ONTARIO MINING COMPANY, Stanley A. Easton, and Myron A. Folsom |
Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
Messrs. Charles S. Thomas, Milton S. Gunn, Edgar T. Brackett, Nash Rockwood, and William E. Cullen, Jr., for plaintiff in error.
Messrs. John P. Gray, Myron A. Folsom, and James E. Gyde for defendants in error.
Contest between the mining companies (they were respectively plaintiff and defendants in the trial court and we shall so designate them) as to certain ore bodies lying beneath the surface of the mining claim of defendants, called the Ontario. Plaintiff asserts ownership to the ore bodies by reason of being owner in fee and in possession of a quartz lode mining claim named the Senator Stewart Fraction Lode Claim. It is alleged that within such claim there
Plaintiff prayed for an accounting and for an injunction against the further mining or extracting of the ore.
Defendants' answer set up opposing contentions and denied the rights alleged by plaintiff. In a cross complaint defendants asserted title and prayed that it be quieted against the claim of plaintiffs. The judgment of the trial court responded to this prayer. The judgment was affirmed by the supreme court of the state (23 Idaho, 724, 132 Pac. 787). This writ of error was then granted.
The case is not embarrassed by any dispute of facts of the title to the respective claims, or of their boundaries, or of the mining of the ore by defendants. The controversy turns entirely upon the construction of § 2322, Revised Statutes of the United States (Comp. Stat. 1913, § 4618). It provides that locators of mining locations
It will be observed, therefore, to summarize the rights conferred by the section, that the locator of a mining claim has the right to the surface included within the lines of his claim, and if a vein has its top or apex within the claim, he may follow such vein downward, though it may depart from a perpendicular in its downward course outside 'of the vertical side lines' of the location,—that is, into adjoining grounds. The length of the side lines and the claim they bound are limited by the end lines, or, as it is expressed in the statute, by vertical planes drawn downward through the end lines. Iron Silver Min. Co. v. Cheesman, 116 U. S. 529, 29 L. ed. 712, 6 Sup. Ct. Rep. 481; Iron Silver Min. Co. v. Elgin Min. & Smelting Co. 118 U. S. 196, 30 L. ed. 98, 6 Sup. Ct. Rep. 1177, 15 Mor. Min. Rep. 641.
The statute would seem to call for no effort of construction, and the distinction which obtains in the parlance of miners and in the cases, between the strike or course and the dip of a vein, is compelled by the statute, and marks accurately the linear and extralateral rights of a location. This certainly, as far as any language can do it, expresses the distinction which must be observed, however various may be the natural conditions. In other words, the strike and the dip of the vein must not be confounded nor the rights dependent upon them confused.
What, then, do they determine in the present case? The plaintiff asserts, as we have seen, that the vein has its top or apex within one of its claims (the Senator Stewart Fraction Lode), and asserts further that the vein extends downward beyond the side lines, within the limits of the end lines extended vertically, to and beneath the claim of defendants, and includes the ore bodies mined by the latter.
These are the facts as found by the trial court:
'That no part of the apex of the said ore bodies lies within the lines of the Senator Stewart Fraction lode mining claim.
'That the plaintiff is the owner, in the possession and entitled to the possession of the Senator Stewart Fraction lode mining claim described in the complaint, with the exception of that part thereof in conflict with the Quaker lode mining claim, which conflict is not material to any issue involved in this case.
'That the end of the vein as the same is terminated on the onward course of the said vein against the fault hereinbefore referred to is the end of the vein on the line of its dip, and the said vein is undercut by the said fault in such manner that if the country below the fault was eroded, it would present the appearance of an overhanging cliff.
'That the said vein is continuous on its onward course from the line of contact with the said great fault, in this case called the Osburn fault, southerly to the ore bodies within the Ontario lode mining claim, and has been followed upon the level in the drifts by the miners from the said edge of the vein to the ore bodies in the Ontario mining claim.
'That the top or apex of said vein which, on its onward course, crosses the south side line of said claim, is practically level.'
The supreme court affirmed the findings and added that the end of the vein against the Osborne fault was 'turned, curled, or cupped upward, caused by the disturbance which created the fault and cut off the vein.' And also said: 'It further appears that this vein is undercut by the Osborne fault in such a manner that if the fault were eroded or washed away, it would leave the vein standing out as an overhanging cliff.' The following diagram exhibits the relations of the claims, the location of the vein, and the Osborne fault:
[NOTE: MATERIAL SET AT THIS POINT IS NOT DISPLAYABLE (GRAPHIC OR TABULAR MATERIAL)]
The contention of plaintiff is that...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Alameda Mining Co. v. Success Mining Co.
... 161 P. 862 29 Idaho 618 ALAMEDA MINING COMPANY, a Corporation, Respondent, v. SUCCESS MINING COMPANY, a Corporation, ... downward in the direction of the dip. ( Stewart Min. Co ... v. Ontario Min. Co., 237 U.S. 350, 35 S.Ct. 610, 59 ... ...
-
United States v. Ickes, 7023.
...as to whether a discovery exists in a particular case is a mixed question of fact and law (See Stewart Mining Co. v. Ontario Mining Co., 237 U.S. 350, 356 35 S.Ct. 610, 59 L.Ed. 989, where a similar question as to the existence of the apex of a vein arose), nevertheless, we appreciate that ......
-
Bowden v. Davis
... ... In North American Cold Storage Company v. City of Chicago, 211 U.S. 306, 29 S.Ct. 101, ... ...
-
Merritt for Merritt v. State
...Id. 98 Idaho at 713, 571 P.2d at 774. In Stewart Min. Co. v. Ontario Min. Co., 23 Idaho 724, 132 P. 787 (1913), aff'd, 237 U.S. 350, 35 S.Ct. 610, 59 L.Ed. 989 (1915), the appellant assigned as error a portion of the trial judge's oral holding announced at the end of the trial. In disposing......
-
CHAPTER 11 EXTRALATERAL RIGHTS IN THE 21ST CENTURY: CONSIDERATIONS FOR TITLE EXAMINATION
...One view - less than 45° terminates extralateral rights. Stewart Mining C. v. Ontario Mining Co., 132 P. 787 (Idaho 1913) (dictum), aff'd, 237 U.S. 350 (1915). — Opposing view - no set amount as long as there is some departure from horizontal. Alameda Mining C v. Success Mining Co., 161 P. ......