Abstracts of Current Decisions on Mines and Mining: May to August, 1917 Page: 24
xiii, 111 p. : ill. ; 23 cm.View a full description of this report.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
DECISIONS ON MINES AND MINING-.
which attends the ownership of ore is not overturned by speculative
conjecture or intelligent guess.
Barker v. Condon (Montana), 165 Pacific 909, p. 913.
OWNERSHIP OF ORE--PROOF OF IDENTITY OF VEIN.
The owner of a mining claim who sues the owner of an adjacent
claim for the value of ore taken from a vein alleged to apex within
his claim and where the ore taken was alleged and conceded to be
under the surface of the defendant's claim must furnish substantial
evidence as to the identity of the vein apexing within his claim with
the vein found and from which the ore was taken under the surface
of the defendant's claim. A failure to furnish satisfactory proof of
the identity and continuity of the vein will bar the plaintiff's right
to recover.
Barker v. Condon (Montana), 165 Pacific 909, p. 913.
PLACER CLAIMS.
MEANING OF TERM.
The term "placer claim" means ground within definite boundaries
which contains minerals, ground that includes valuable deposits not
in place.
United States v. Ohio Oil Co., 240 Federal 996, p. 1000.
OIL LOCATION.
DISCOVERY.
In an oil location it is the finding of petroleum in or upon the
ground and so situated as to constitute a part of it that constitutes
a discovery. But the oil or mineral need not be of commercial value.
United States v. Ohio Oil Co. 240 Federal 996, p. 998.
SUFFICIENCY AND DETERMINATION.
In determining the sufficiency of a discovery in an oil location it
must be considered with reference to the special facts and conditions
shown to exist in the particular mining district where the claim is
located and in connection with the facts before the court.
United States v. Ohio Oil Co., 240 Federal 996, p. 998.
DISCOVERY-OIL SEEPAGE.
It can not be said that the discovery of seepage oil upon a mining
location could not in any case constitute a discovery as required by
the statute; and it would be erroneous to say that in every case where
seepage oil is found upon a mining location it is sufficient to constitute
a discovery.
United States v. Ohio Oil Co., 240 Federal 996, p. 998.24
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This report can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Report.
Thompson, Joseph Wesley. Abstracts of Current Decisions on Mines and Mining: May to August, 1917, report, December 1917; Washington D.C.. (https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc38745/m1/38/?rotate=270: accessed April 18, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, UNT Digital Library, https://digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.