Mammoth Mining Co. v. Grand Central Mining Co.

delivered the opinion of the court.

' This suit was begun by the Grand Central Mining Company

Both of the parties are Utah corporations, and the suit was in a state court. The ground on which this court is asked to take jurisdiction is that the decision of the Supreme Court on the facts rested on a definition of a lode orvein which the plaintiff in error contests, and therefore turned on the construction of Rev. Stats., § 2322. There is-a faint argument on the other point that we have mentioned, that the defendant in error had no right to ore beneath the surface of the Silveropolis claim, unless from a vein having its apex there, but that, if relevant, has been' disposed of by previous decisions of this court and may be disregarded. St. Louis Mining & Milling Co. v. Montana Mining Co., 194 U. S. 235 . So also may an attempt to reopen the findings of fact. Of course, if these findings rest on a false definition they may have to be reconsidered, and cannot be assumed to be correct. But the evidence will not be discussed here. The only

The record discloses that the Mammoth Company in its cross complaint set up the proposition as the limits of the title under the Silveropolis claim that we have dismissed, and that' it alleged that it set up a title under the laws of the United States. The record also shows that at the trial the judge called in an advisory jury, and that he gave them certain instructions as to what constitutes the apex of a vein, &c.; and it is argued that it must be assumed that the judge, when he made his findings of fact adverse to the Mammoth Company was governed by the same views of the law. But the cross complaint by itself shows no warrant for this writ of error, and as the case went to the Supreme Court by appeal, and the facts were discussed at great length and reestablished by that court, it is in the opinion of that cou'rt alone, if anywhere, that the supposed error must be found.. Indeed the instructions to the jury were treated as immaterial by that court, and held not to be a ground for reversal, even if wrong, if the judgment was right upon the evidence. It is necessary, therefore, to show the nature of the case and of the course of reasoning followed by the.Supreme Court of the State.

For the character of the country where the question arises we quote from the judgment under review:

“ The mines are found in a lime belt which covers about two square miles, and is the great producing area of the Tintic district. In some places the limestone beds are upturned, large areas tilted upon edge, the beds dipping nearly vertically down; while in other places they dip at lower angles, arid in special areas the dips are quite uniform; and again, though, it seems, not frequently, anticlinals exist. This limestone is surrounded on all sides, except the north, by igneous rocks. The sedimentary rocks are broken up and fractured, evidently the result of igneous intrusion. The limestone carries some iron, the different forms of iron oxide,-also some manganese, and in places the limestone is crushed, crumbled, and brecciated. . ... The

surface of the limestone area, wherever exposed, is marked with innumerable seams, cracks, and small fissures filled with carbonate of lime, stained more or less with iron, and sometimes manganese. Quartz, spar, and. other materials, characteristic, in general, of mineral-bearing limestone areas, are present, and in places the surface is brecciated and.recemented. A trace of mineral, and of one or more of the precious metals, and, in places, more than a trace, even where there is no known vein, seems also to be a characteristic of that lime belt.”

In the belt thus described the Mammoth. Company’s Lot 38 runs northeasterly, and the Silveropolis claim about north, its southerly boundary being considerably further north than the southern boundary of Lot 38. It is admitted that the apex of a vein extends northerly in Lot 38 from its southern boundary for six hundred and ninety feet to' a point ninety feet south of the southern boundary of the Silveropolis claim extended. But the Utah courts found that at that, point the vein on its strike and at its apex, wholly departs from Lot 38, in a northwesterly and then in a more northerly direction, whereas the Mammoth Company contends that it continues in that lot to a line 1,100 feet distant from its southerly lineand that large deposits of ore, taken by the court to represent the strike of the vein, really are upon its dip.

In coming to its conclusion the Supreme Court, after, stating the presumption that the ore belongs to the owner of the claim under which it is found, lays great stress on the fact that the Mammoth Company could not locate the: hanging or foot wall of the supposed vein north of the point at which the vein was found to leave Lot 38. It goes on to find that by the preponderance of evidence the surface indications.for a long distance east and west of Lot 38, north of the point indicated above, are the same as those in the lot. It reaches the samé result from assays of numerous samples, taken from the open cuts and exposures in the same part of the lot. It then elaborately discusses the workings, underground. It says.that the fact is clear that the ore always is found near the line of the'great ore bodies.

The court observes that a vein cannot be said to exist merely because rock is crushed, shattered, or even fissured, and that what will constitute one must depend somewhat upon the na-tufe of the country in which it is alleged to be found. It fully recognizes that a true vein may be barren in places, but concludes that to allow the Mammoth Company's claim would, amount practically-to declaring the whole limestone area to be one vein, thousánds of feet wide. After calling attention to the admitted fact that the vein has well-defined boundaries and strike from the south end of Lot 38 for about seven hundred feet, it finds that the same conditions continue to exist from there on ' in a northwesterly direction oútside the limits of the lot, and that the ore bodies found outside those limits are on the strike and not upon the dip. It calls attention to the almost vertical dip of the vein at specified places, and is of opinion from that and other .facts discussed in detail that no dip is shown that could carry a vein from Lpt 38 tp the ore bodies in dispute. It finds its conclusions confirmed i by the conduct of the Mafomoth Gompany during all' the years of operation in its mine',' making a strong argument that it is not necessary to reoiteC

We deem it unnecessary to discuss the opinion below at greater length, as we think it entirely plain, upon a study of the lengthy and careful discussion, that it presents no question that we can be asked to review. The plaintiff in error makes an elaborate argument upon the-evidence that the Supreme Court was wrong in. its findings of fact. We repeat that upon the writ of error we shall not go into such matters. It is enough to say that upon the facts as found neither the record nor the opinion presents a Federal question, and that therefore the writs of error must be dismissed.

Writs of error dismissed.