Abstracts of Current Decisions on Mines and Mining: May to August, 1917 Page: 23
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
CONSTRUCTION AND EXTENT.
A patent to a lode mining claim operates to convey not only the
described tract of land patented by the locator, but also the lode
contained therein with the right to follow the same in its downward
course into adjoining premises, but not to follow it when on its
onward course or strike it departs from the vertical side lines. In
the latter case, after its departure, it is the subject of location by
whomsoever it might be discovered.
Whilden v. Maryland Gold Quartz Mining Co. (California App.), 164 Pacific 908,
GRANT OF SURFACE BEYOND THE BOUNDARIES.
A patent to a mining claim under the United States mining
statutes granting to the applicant and patentee the mine, together
with the right to follow the vein or lode with its dip; angles, and
variations to any depth although it may enter into adjoining land,
gives to the grantee the fee-simple title to the land within the sur-
face boundaries as the claim was located, and so much of the vein
or lode as apexed within the exterior.surface boundaries of the claim
with the right to follow such vein or lode on its dip beyond the
vertical planes of the side lines; but the patent conveys no part of
the lode or of the land on the surface beyond the exterior boundaries
of the claim as located.
Whilden v. Maryland Gold Quartz Mining Co. (California App.) 164 Pacific 908,
PRESUMPTION-BURDEN OF PROOF.
Where a mineral claimant passes beyond the vertical plane of a
side line of his claim and is found extracting and removing ore from
beneath the surface of an adjoining mining claim, the presumption
is against him, and prima facie he is a trespasser unless and until
he makes it appear that he reached the point from which the ore
was taken by following on its dip a vein or lode having its apex within
the surface lines of his claim.
Barker v. Condon (Montana), 165 Pacific 909, p. 912.
OWNERSHIP OF ORE--PROOF TO OVERCOME PRESUMPTION.
Ore presumptively belongs to the owner of a mining claim because
beneath the surface of his claim, and it can not rightfully be taken
from him on the evidence of witnesses in favor of an adjoining sur-
face claimant who entertained the opinion that the vein containing
the ore had its apex in such adjacent claim, as the presumption
Here’s what’s next.
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.. (digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc38745/m1/37/: accessed December 14, 2017), University of North Texas Libraries, Digital Library, digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.