Section 993.-OVERLAPPING LOCATIONS.-It is familiar history in mining districts that claims have often been found to overlap one another to a greater or less extent. When this occurs, the law of California is, in so far as the ground taken was vacant, each location, if properly made in other respects, is valid and sufficient to that extent. As to the ground actually covered by the two locations, the right will be determined by ascertaining which location was first made. If A makes a location to-day, and B makes a location to-morrow, and the location of B covers a part of the ground located by A the day before, B will lose so much of his location as overlaps the location of A; for A was first in time, and thus acquired a prior right. But B will not lose his whole location. So much of it as does not overlap the prior location will be good, and he can hold that much. (Decided by the Supreme Court of California in the case of Doe vs. Tyler, which decision is printed in Volume 73 of the California Reports, page 21.)

Section 994.-INTERSECTING VEINS.-Where two veins or lodes of mineral belonging to different owners intersect, the owner of the vein which was first located has the right to the ore in the space of intersection, but the other owner has a right of way through such space for the purpose of working his vein. (Decided by the Supreme

Court of California in the case of Wilhelm vs. Silvester, which decision is printed in Volume 101 of the California Reports, page 358.)

Section 995.-RULE THAT END LINES SHALL PARALLEL EACH OTHER.-The Revised Statutes of the United States say that "the end lines of each claim shall be parallel with each other." But this does not mean that the two end lines must be exactly parallel. In the case of Doe vs. Sanger, a San Bernardino County mining suit, the Supreme Court of California stated the true rule as follows: "It has been held that the provisions of the

Federal statutes relating to lode claims were passed with the understanding, founded upon the general practice of miners, that the surface locations of such claims will be made lengthwise along the general direction of the lode or vein in the general form of a parallelogram, with the side lines along the lode, and the end lines across it. But suppose that a surface location should be made, for instance, in the shape of an octagon. In such a case there would be no end lines and no side lines, and if the locator could go outside his lines in one direction he could do so in eight directions, and encroach upon his neighbors from every point of the compass. If, however, a location is made in substantial compliance with the intent of the statute that is, where there are two side lines running along the course of the vein, and two shorter end lines running across it, so that the two sets of lines are distinct, and apparent— such a location is not void, but gives the right to follow a vein laterally, although the original end lines may not be exactly parallel, or although they may differ from a true parallel." (Decided by the Supreme Court of California in the case of Doe vs. Sanger, which decision is printed in Volume 83 of the California Reports, page 203.)

EXTRA-LATERAL

RIGHT,

Section 996. OR RIGHT TO PURSUE THE VEIN OR LODE ON ITS DIP BEYOND THE SIDE LINES OF THE CLAIM. -Section 2322 of the Revised Statutes of the United States provides: "The locators of all mining locations shall have the exclusive right of possession and enjoyment of all the surface included within the lines of their locations, and all veins, lodes, and ledges throughout their entire depth the top or apex of which lies inside of such surface lines extended downward vertically, although such veins, lodes, or ledges may so far depart from a perpendicular in their course downward as to extend outside of the vertical side lines of such surface locations." A mineral vein or lode seldom or never descends vertically into the earth, but on its downward course makes an angle with the vertical

or, in popular terms, it does not go straight down, but in a slanting direction-so that, if followed far enough into the interior of the earth, it will eventually be found to extend outside of the side lines of the claim. In other words, the vein eventually reaches the point in the interior of the earth where, if a vertical line were run to the surface it would strike a point outside the surface boundaries of the claim. The right to thus follow the vein on its downward course beyond the side lines of the claim is sometimes called the extra-lateral right, and is conferred by the Section of the Revised Statutes of the United States just quoted. In thus following the vein on its dip, the miner is confined, however, to that part of it which is found between the end. lines of his claim extended in their own direction. The law prescribes that the end lines of a claim shall be parallel with each other. Yet for the full enjoyment of this extralateral right it is important that the end lines of the claim should follow this requirement of parallelism; for it has been held by the courts that where the end lines were not parallel, but converged in the direction of the dip of the vein, the miner could not pursue the vein outside of his side lines beyond the point where his converging end lines extended met. On the other hand, where the end lines diverged in the direction of the dip, thus making the portion of the vein included within them larger the farther such end lines were extended, it has been held that the miner could not take the ore from any greater length of vein outside of his side lines than was included between his end lines as laid down on the ground.

Section 997.-DAMAGES FOR TRESPASS ON MINING CLAIM.-One who unintentionally, and in the honest belief that he is lawfully exercising a right which he has, enters upon the mining property of another and removes his ore, is liable in damages for its value, and for no more. He may limit the recovery of the owner by deducting from the value of the ore at the mouth of the shaft the cost of mining and transporting it to that point. But one who

wilfully and intentionally takes ores from the land of another is liable to him for the full value of the property taken, at the time of his conversion of it, without any deduction for the labor bestowed or expense incurred in removing it and preparing it for the market.

Section 998. - STATE HOMESTEAD ON MINING CLAIM.-The locator of a mining claim may, under the State law, declare a homestead upon it, if he is living on it; and when that is done it has all the characteristics of a homestead declared upon any other character of land; subject, however, to the holder complying with the requirements of the law relating to the holding of mining claims until issue of patent from the United States Government. (Decided by the Supreme Court of California in the case of Gaylord vs. Place, which decision is printed in Volume 98 of the California Reports, page 472.)

Section 999.-SCHOOL LANDS.-The law of Congress granting certain agricultural lands to the State of California for school purposes, and providing that mineral lands shall not be subdivided into sections, public lands belonging to the State under said Act, if agricultural, which the proper United States officials have platted into a section and classified as agricultural lands, and concerning which the Receiver of the public land office has certified that the State's title thereto under said Act is free from adverse claims, are not, after their disposal by the State, subject to re-entry as mineral lands; the determination of the United States officials that the lands were agricultural being conclusive against a collateral attack. (Decided by the Supreme Court of California in the case of Saunders. vs. La Purisima Gold Mining Co., which decision is printed in Volume 125 of the California Reports, page 159.)

Section 1000.-AUTHORITY OF MINE SUPERINTENDENT TO PURCHASE SUPPLIES.-Mine Superintendents, by virtue of their position, have authority to

purchase all supplies necessary for the operation of the mine; and when they do so the owners will be bound to pay for them. In one case it was held by our Supreme Court that the owner of the mine was bound to pay for provisions ordered by the Superintendent for a boarding house at which the miners lived, and the Court said: "The record discloses the fact that it was absolutely necessary that provisions should be furnished this boarding-house, in order that the mine might continue in operation; and it would seem that, aside from any express authority from the defendant to purchase these articles, and regardless of the question of ostensible agency, the respective Superintendents of the mine, by virtue of their positions alone, had the power to bind the defendant for the payment of these goods." (Decided by the Supreme Court of California in the case of Heald vs. Hendy, which decision is printed in Volume 89 of the California Reports, page 632.)

Section 1001. HYDRAULIC

MINING.-Hydraulic

mining, as the term is used in the laws of California, is mining by means of the application of water, under pressure, through a nozzle, against a natural bank. It may be car

ried on in this State wherever and whenever it can be done without material injury to the navigable streams, or the lands adjacent thereto.

Civil Code, Sections 1424, 1425.

Section 1002.-TAILINGS AND DEBRIS.-No person or corporation has the right to cover his neighbor's land with debris from mine or mill, nor to permit any of the tailings or refuse matter to flow or be placed on the land of another. For the violation of another's right of use and possession, by flowing or covering his land with debris, or by causing his soil to wash or cave, the owner of the mine will be liable in damages, and the injury may be stopped by injunction.