of the law, I will take the hypothetical case, originally illustrated by Justice Beatty, and somewhat modified by Dr. Raymond, in his paper, "The Law of the Apex " (Trans., xii., 436), and, finally, slightly changed by myself. I adopt the supposed state of facts given in that paper. The slightly Fig. 9 represents the apex of a lode A CE B D, dipping, in a general way, as shown by the arrows in the locations, C and D, and dipping at the ends of the different parts of the apex, inclosed with the different claims, as shown by the arrowed lines of dip at these ends, to wit: the lines m q, m, q', cl, g h. At x, y At x, y and z there are croppings upon the surface. curved line O P is a horizontal line drawn in the center of the lode or vein at that level, and is, therefore, the true strike line of the vein at that level, which all the dip-lines at that level must cross at right angles. The variations in the course of the apex are due partly to the fact that the strike-line of the vein is, as usual, not a straight line, and partly and mainly to the topography of the surface. The most violent of these variations is caused by a precipitous ravine, cutting through the vein, exposing the outcrop, z, in the face of the precipice, while on the other side of the ravine, the outcrop, w, shows the same vein continuing with the same general strike and dip. Between the outcrops, x, y and z, the course of the apex has been determined by shafts and surface-workings. Upon this lode, A, B, C, D and E have made locations in the succession as indicated by the letters, A first and E last, placing the surface-lines of their respective locations as indicated by the boundary-lines of the claims in the diagram. What are the respective possessory rights of these locators on the vein? A, although the first comer, locates his claim, locates his claim, a a a a, in such a manner, that the downward course or the dip of his part of the vein (the part having the outcrop or apex, g g', which is the part he has the right to possess and enjoy) is wholly contained in the narrow strip of ground between the dip-lines g h and g' h'. But, by locating his side-lines in the manner given in the diagram, he still further limits the part of the vein allowed him by the law, and restricts his right to the lode A CE BD to the small portion underlying the triangular piece of ground gx g', as the law prohibits him from following the dip of his part of the vein beyond the intersection of his vertical end-line plane a a x a', with the part of the vein, the top or apex of which is inside the surface-lines of his claim. His "right of possession to such outside parts of such veins.... shall be confined to such portions thereof as lie be tween vertical planes drawn downwards [vertically] through the endlines of [his] location, so continued in their own direction, that such planes will intersect such exterior parts of such veins or ledges,"-is the language of the law. The law does not say that all that part of the vein shall be his which lies between his prolonged end-line-planes. It only limits the parts of veins owned by him to that space of ground. Outside of that piece of ground he cannot own any part of any vein by virtue of his possession of the claim. How much of any vein he owns inside of this space of ground, depends on the position and the length of the apex, and on the direction of the dip of any vein of which he may own a part in this ground. In locating along the apex of the vein, from g to g', A could not have acquired any larger part of the vein from the apex g g' downward, or that part between the dip-lines g h and g'h'. But, by locating his end-lines parallel to the true dip of the vein, of which even very slight developments on his vein near the outcrop z, combined with the visible outcrops w, y and x, must or could have given him an indication, he might have virtually secured that part of the vein corresponding to that part of the apex of the vein located by him, throughout its entire depth. He might have done this by laying his end-lines in the direction of the dip of the lode. If he was allowed, as has been frequently claimed, to follow the lode "downward" (?) in a direction parallel to his end-lines, he would be virtually following a large portion of the vein "along its strike or course" across his side-line: e.g., in working that part of the vein underlying the area g a ƒ ƒ', a1, x a g', he would be following the course or the strike of the vein from his apex g g', across his sideline a a. There is only one downward course to follow from any point of the apex of a vein, and that is by following the dip-line of the vein from that point of the apex. The law does not propose to rectify errors of judgment made by any one in the location of claims. If A had any knowledge of veins or lodes, he must have seen from the inclination of the apex between g and g', with the necessary aid possibly of a small amount of development, that he was locating his claim practically along the dip of the vein instead of along its course; and if he, knowing or not knowing this, chose to make the location, he has to abide by the consequences of his own choice. As he was the first comer, there was no obstacle even (if, for some reason, he wanted to include the outcrop, *, in his claim) to his locating more than one claim. If, for any reason, he fails to do so, and sticks to his location, a a a a, he has to abide by the consequences of his own choice of locating that part of the apex. If that part of the apex, although 1500 feet long, is only in reality the outcrop of a part of the vein, 200 feet long, he can claim only 200 feet along the vein as his own. And if, moreover, he places his endlines in such a position as to diminish still further his right to the possession of these 200 feet to their full depth, he certainly has no right to blame the law for his mistake. The law allows him full liberty to place his end-lines at any angle to the direction of his part of the outcrop. B, on the same grounds, will own the part of the vein underlying the area, m b' b q'm'. C will own the part of the vein underlying the area c l' ic' g. E will own all that part of the vein between the dip-lines m' q' q" and cll'. A will also own that part of the vein underlying the triangular piece c' i A, because C, by locating his end-lines, as shown in the diagram, forfeited that part of the vein underlying the space between the intersecting lines c' il l' and c' A x h, and A owns by common. law anything not excepted beneath his surface. Those parts of the vein underlying the area l'li Axa g' h', and the area qb" bq' q', belong to neither of the five locations, and are open to appropriation by surface-location to any one who first makes a valid location of these parts of the surface. Any other interpretation of the law would lead to inextricable confusion, as shown in Mr. Raymond's able paper cited above, from which this hypothetical case has been taken. The law is plain and easy of construction and application, as soon as the identity of the true dip of a vein with the "downward course" of Section 2322 of the Revised Statutes is once recognized. But if there is anything in geological science about which there is no doubt or controversy, it is the definition of the dip or the downward course of any vein, bed, formation or stratum. The downward course of any vein is no questionable or optional direction, but can be mathematically ascertained by survey. The steepest pitch of the vein at any point of the vein is the direction of the dip of the vein at that point, and this direction is necessarily at right angles to the direction of the strike of the vein at the same point. Thus the line of dip from any point of the vein downward is easily ascertained by survey, especially as the main openings on any vein or lode generally follow the course of the vein on a level. In the few cases where any dispute as to the dividing boundary-lines of two adjoining extra-lateral rights to the same vein could occur, it would become thus simply a question of survey to establish the boundary-line of the extra-lateral right of the two adjoining claims on the same vein. In most cases the boundary-lines between two adjoining extralateral rights to one vein would be two diverging lines, the one a dip-line, the other a prolonged end line, enclosing a wedge-shaped piece of the vein, to which really none of the compromising parties held any legal right of ownership, and which would belong to the party possessing that portion of the surface. THE OCCURRENCE AND TREATMENT OF THE ARGENTIFEROUS MANGANESE-ORES OF TOMBSTONE DISTRICT, ARIZONA. BY CHARLES W. GOODALE, BUTTE, MONT. (NOTE.-Additional to the paper under this title, Trans., xvii., 767.) As an appendix to the above-mentioned paper, a drawing of the vertical projection of the Knoxville mine workings is here given. In my paper it was stated that the ore-chimneys are found along a crack or plane of cleavage in the limestone; and as this crack is not parallel with the strata, it is safe to assume that the manganese was not deposited where it is now found before the tilting-up of the strata, but rather that the crack was caused by the folding, and that the formation of the ore was entirely subsequent to the change of position of the limestone. There are here four chimneys, which have produced, as far as explored, over 12,000 tons of ore, containing at least 7000 tons of manganese oxides, and it is very difficult to apply Prof. W. P. Blake's theory of segregation from the surrounding limestone in accounting for the origin of this ore, as cross-cuts and drifts in the countryrock, even at short distances from the ore-chimneys, have not shown manganese in appreciable quantities. It is easier to believe that, in the language of Mr. S. F. Emmons, in speaking of Leadville ore-deposits, there was a metasomatic interchange between the minerals brought in in solution and the limestone, and not a deposition in already existing cavities. This in |