Bethlehem Paper - Lode Locations-A Discussion of Recent Decisions of the Supreme Court under the United States Mining Law

In my former paper (Bans., xii., 410) I quoted the ruling of Judge Hallett, of Colorado, in the "Iron-Smuggler" case, tried before him in June, 1882. Under his charge, the jury in that case found for the defendants, practically declaring that the deposit on the outcrop of which the Iron Silver Mining Company's claim was located was not a " lode," or else that the portion of it within that claim was not the apex. The case was appealed, and the decision of the Supreme Court, given in February, 1886, is reported in 116 U. S. Reports, p. 529. It simply declares that there is nothing in the charge of Judge Hallett to warrant the setting aside the verdict. The definition of a legal lode given in that case, and quoted in my paper at the page above-named, is perhaps the best of several which Judge Hallet has pronounced. That is to say, his earlier definition, that " a lode or vein is a body of mineral, or mineral-bearing rock, within defined boundaries in the general mass of the mountain," is here accompanied with further explanations, which relieve it from the requirement on one hand, that the body shall be continuously ore-bearing if it he only well-defined, and, on the other hand, that the boundaries shall be well-defined if the ore-bearing body be proved to exist. So far as this particular case is concerned, the approval of this ruling by the Supreme Court merely prevents any re-hearing as to the face. Undoubtedly, the evidence was conflicting; and the jury chose to believe, for the purpose of that occasion, the " experts " who