Starless Mine

Index For This Page

This page last updated on May 12, 2024.

Overview

Starless mine was one of Enos A. Wall's properties in Bingham Canyon, and was made up of eight patented claims, covering a total of 160 acres. The mine lay northeast of the holdings of the Utah Copper Co., and was developed by an incline shaft and numerous tunnels, the longest of which (in 1916) was 2,000 feet, with crosscuts and upraises, aggregating a total of 10,000 feet. The mine owners stated that they had blocked out 800,000 tons of 1 to 2 percent copper ore. Equipment included a hoist.

The Starless mine bordered the Utah Copper property immediately along Utah Copper's north side. The ore in the Starless was the same as in the Utah Copper property, but deeper and would have been more expensive to extract due to more cover ground and close proximity to the commercial parts of Bingham Canyon. There were four underground tunnels at four different levels, adding up to a total of 6000 feet, but all were part of the development work to determine the extent of the ore body. The mine never went into production due to projected high cost of operation.

The following comes from The Mining Investor, Volume 57, January 3, 1910.

The Starless mine at Bingham, belonging to Col. E . A. Wall, contains the same ore bodies as the Utah Copper and the Ohio Copper company and development work thus far proves the ore body to be equal in grade, or slightly better, than these properties. The Starless lies just northeast of the Utah Copper and may have the apex rights to a portion of the Utah Copper company's ores. In fact a suit has been started recently by Col. Wall against the Utah Copper company for alleged trespass upon his ore bodies and to determine the apex question of the same.

The Starless group is all patented and it contains about 160 acres. Development work has been going on steadily for a number of years and aggregates over 10,000 feet. The property is being developed by main tunnels from which crosscuts are run and up-raises made. The mine is well equipped with hoisting engines and all other accessories necessary for the development of the property.

Tho Dewey mill at Bingham is owned by Col. Wall and has recently been remodeled and put in running order. The concentrating apparatus installed in this mill was designed by Col. Wall himself and demonstrations prove that it saves a very much larger per cent of the values from the low grade Bingham Copper ore than the ordinary concentrating devices. The low grade Bingham ores, such as occur in the Starless, Utah Copper, and Boston Consolidated can be concentrated successfully if the proper apparatus is used. It is said that in the Utah Copper company's mill the saving is about 55 per cent and in the Boston Consolidated mill the saving is about 70 per cent. If such is the case, millions of dollars worth of copper is going into the tailings pile. It would seem that a 90 per cent extraction should be made on this ore and it is the opinion of well posted millmen that he will succeed in making this extraction when his concentrating devices are thoroughly tried out.

The original ore bodies in Bingham were developed by Col. Wall in the property now belonging to the Utah Copper company. He was one of the organizers of that company and one of the original stockholders. A great portion of the property belonging to that company was purchased from Col. Wall, who secured it in the early days of the camp. Col. Wall always had faith in the copper ore bodies and developed them steadily when others were looking for gold and silver. He went through many hardships in order to retain the property and finally sold an interest to Col. Delamar in order to prosecute development work. His faith was finally rewarded as his interest in the property has made him several millions of dollars.

Other interests in the Bingham camp are owned by Col. Wall, who is gradually developing them and placing them in shape for production.

Timeline

December 25, 1891
The oldest reference to the adjoining Starless and Amanda claims, owned by George E. Lee and L. C. Jeffery, noting that a tunnel was being completed to reach the good ore. At the same time, Enos Wall was shown as owning claims in the "copper belt," including the Key, Khedive, and the Treasure where native copper was first found. (Salt Lake Herald, December 25, 1891)

August 12, 1896
The Starless mine was reported as "filling its bins" with gold ore worth between $35 and $900 per ton. But shipments had not yet begun. (Salt Lake Herald, August 12, 1896)

August 20, 1897
The West Mountain Gold and Copper Mining company was incorporated in Salt Lake City. On August 24th, the company purchased the St. Patrick claim from J. B. Stephens and associates. Within a week, work began on a 4x6 tunnel, 50 feet deep, to begin development of the mine. Assays at the surface were as much as $26 in gold. (Salt Lake Herald, August 21, 1897, "yesterday"; Salt Lake Tribune, August 25, 1897; September 6, 1897)

September 4, 1898
The St. Patrick Group of the West Mountain Gold and Copper Mining company was made up of five separate claims. The entire group was being surveyed to apply for a patent. (Salt Lake Herald, September 4, 1898)

October 26, 1898
A news item that J. C. Page had purchased an option on the Starless lode for the sum of $1, from O. S. Richardson and associates. (Salt Lake Tribune, October 26, 1898)

June 27, 1901
A special stockholders meeting was held to approve an agreement to sell all claims of the West Mountain Gold and Copper Mining company to Charles E. Knapp. August Lenke was shown as company president. (Salt Lake Tribune, daily notices, May 25 to June 26, 1901; the sale was approved)

September 8, 1901
A news item about George E. Lee and L. C. Jeffery, of Bingham, selling their interest in the Starless group of claims, to James C. Page, August Lenke, and Omar S. Richardson, all of Chicago. Lenke, Page and Richardson also sold their interest in the Amanda, Azurite Fraction, and A. L. Location claims to the existing West Mountain Gold and Copper company. Lee and Jeffery also sold their interest in the Keystone, Klondike, and Mabel Fraction claims to the West Mountain company. The purchaser was noted as being Charles E. Knapp of Chicago who had purchased 12 mining claims in Bingham, including the Horseshoe, Lucy Q., St. Patrick, Mabel G., and Sarsfield claims, and that he and others had recently taken control of the West Mountain Gold and Copper company, with August Lenke as president. (Salt Lake Herald, September 8, 1901)

(This was when the Starless Group was created as a single group of mining claims.)

(The sale was made final in early May 1902, noting that L. C. Jeffery and associates of Bingham, had sold to O. S. Richardson and associates of Chicago, the Starless, Keystone, Mabel and Klondike claims in Bingham, for a reported $3,000. -- Salt Lake Herald, May 6, 1902)

A 1901 map of the Bingham mining district showed that the Starless Group consisted (north to south) of the Keystone, Starless, Klondike, and Amanda claims. North and east of and adjacent to the Keystone claim was the Horse Shoe Group, which was made up of the Sarsfield, Horse Shoe, St. Patrick, Lucy Q., and Mabel G. claims.

By the time of a 1906 map, the Starless Group had been expanded to include the Horse Shoe Group.

In both the 1901 map and the 1906 map, the Utah Copper group was immediately adjacent to the Starless Group along its southern edge, and the Ohio Copper group was immediately adjacent to the east of both the Starless and Utah Copper groups.

(The lack of newspaper coverage for any ore being shipped from the Starless and associated mining claims by these Chicago owners, showing a lack of shipment of either class 1 smelter ore, or class 2 milling ore, indicates that their explorations only found low-grade porphyry copper ores, thus making the mine uneconomical to operate during this period between 1898 and 1905.)

April 17, 1905
Enos Wall obtained an option on the Starless group of mining claims. "The Starless group consists of eight patented claims, about 115 acres. It is owned by the Oquirrh-Bingham company, the stock being held by Chicago parties." "Colonel Wall, who has done more to develop the copper resources of this camp than any other man, may be relied upon to develop the ground along effective lines, and will give his attention entirely to the porphyry side of the property. The Amanda tunnel, on the south side of the group, will be extended several hundred feet" to develop the mineralized ground that has been so rich in the adjacent Utah Copper ground. The ore was of low grade, but there was a mountain of it. The Amanda tunnel had been driven 80 feet into the mountain, and the porphyry shows no sign of diminishing. Shipping 1000 tons per day, it would take 150 years to exhaust the ore body. (Salt Lake Herald, April 17, 1905; Salt Lake Tribune, May 19, 1905; Salt Lake Telegram, May 20, 1905)

(Research has found that the newspapers were confused about the names of the groups of mining claims that Wall purchased in April 1905. The Starless Group was previously owned by the West Mountain Gold and Copper Mining company. The Horseshoe Group was previously owned by the Oquirrh-Bingham Copper company. The confusion came from the fact that Charles Knapp and his Chicago associates owned or at least held majority stock in both companies.)

April 25, 1905
A special stockholders meeting was held to approve an option for purchase of all claims of the West Mountain Gold and Copper Mining company by James A. Hogle.

April 27, 1905
The option to James Hogle was approved, and he turned the option over to Enos Wall. (Salt Lake Tribune, April 27, 1905)

(There were no further references in online newspapers to the West Mountain company after these notices in April 1905, other than a note in March 1910, along with thousands of other corporations, that the West Mountain company was delinquent for non-payment of state corporate license tax.)

May 5, 1905
The sale of the Starless Group to Enos Wall was made final upon his paying in full the purchase amount, several months in advance of the contracted date. In addition to the Starless Group, the final sale included the "Keystone lode, etc." and the "Horseshoe lode, etc." (Salt Lake Tribune, May 5, 1905)

May 20, 1905
Enos Wall took a lease on the Dewey mill, and began rebuilding it to concentrate the low-grade (two percent) copper porphyry ore from his newly leased Starless property. (Salt Lake Tribune, May 20, 1905)

(Although the profit potential was reported as being enormous, the limitations of extraction by underground methods, and transportation by the Copper Belt railroad, which ran over a part of the group's ground, would soon make the operation uneconomical without large sums of funding resources. And those resources were already focused on the adjacent Utah Copper operation.)

(The Starless was severely restricted in its development by anything other than underground methods, due to the group being located next to the Copper Belt railroad, and by the commercial and residential buildings at the junction of Carr Fork and Bingham Canyon. Utah Copper, farther to the south by about a half mile, and at least 100 feet higher, did not have this limitation.)

September 10, 1905
Enos Wall and the Oquirrh-Bingham Copper Company agreed to a judgment in a "friendly" law suit that quieted any claim the Oquirrh-Bingham company might have had in any title, ownership or interest in the Starless or Horse Shoe groups of claims. Charles E. Knapp of Chicago was one of the principals of the Oquirrh-Bingham company. (Salt Lake Tribune, September 10, 1905; Salt Lake Herald, September 10, 1905)

The Oquirrh-Bingham Copper Company had been organized in Wyoming in January 1902. (Salt Lake Mining Review, January 30, 1902)

May 13, 1906
Enos Wall visited the Boston Consolidated test mill to observe its way of reducing the porphyry ore. He was making regular statements that his own mill would soon also be processing porphyry from his Starless group. (Salt Lake Herald, May 13, 1906)

May 15, 1906
Enos Wall was reported as ordering and installing a power house, a compressor plant large enough to power eight drills, and other machinery to begin driving a new tunnel that was located 110 feet below the current Starless prospecting tunnel. The new tunnel was planned to be over 600 feet into the mountain to reach the desired ore body. (Salt Lake Herald, May 15, 1906; June 20, 1906; Salt Lake Tribune, July 8, 1906)

Newspaper accounts throughout 1906 and 1907 made glowing remarks about the potential of the Starless mine, continuing to report that the mine was still in development, and that the mill was still being repaired and remodeled, especially after a recent derailment of Copper Belt rail cars that had damaged the mill. By early 1908, Wall was saying that as soon as metal prices improved, he would resume work on his properties. By mid 1908, Wall was saying that his mill was too small, and would not be able to handle the quantities of ore that would soon be coming from his Starless property. Statements by Wall in September 1908 continued in promising that production from the mine and mill would begin very soon, also that the mill was still under repairs from damage due to Copper Belt derailments.

Throughout 1909 the limited newspaper coverage of Wall and his Starless mine was, other than reports of the mine's potential, regular coverage of Wall's fight with Bingham City over his damming of the creek, stopping its flow completely to allow him to use the water in his mine , and lower in the canyon, his mill. The mine still was not in production, other than occasional small shipments of silver-lead ore discovered during development work.

December 1, 1909
Enos Wall sued Utah Copper for the value of 215,000 tons of ore, valued at $1,290,000, which he claimed had been illegally removed by Utah Copper company from the Amanda mining claim which he owned. The original suit was in Third District Court, and in June 1914, the suit was transferred to the United States district court. The case continued to be heard in several sessions, but was still undecided by late April 1916. On July 14, 1916, Judge Johnson of the U. S. court handed down his decision that Utah Copper was entitled to the ore that had been extracted because of the conflicting boundary lines between the Amanda claim (in the Starless group), and several adjoining claims in the Charles Read group, owned by Utah Copper. (Salt Lake Herald, June 26, 1914; April 30, 1916; Ogden Standard, July 15, 1916)

June 20, 1910
Wall mill still experimental -- "Located in a slight bend of the Copper Belt railroad, it has been the target for runaway trains and engines for years past until battered and shattered it reminds one of an old fortress. Every time it has been wrecked, it has been rebuilt each time with some new improvement reflecting the genius of the owner. When the plant has passed the experimental stage and is fully equipped for a permanent run, it will be used to handle the ores from the Starless mine, which is also Colonel Wall's property. These ores run from 3 to 10 per cent copper and there is ore enough blocked out to last for years to come." (Salt Lake Tribune, June 20, 1910)

The on-going news during 1910 and 1911 was that the adjacent Montana-Bingham mine was cutting the same ore vein as the Starless. Other reports included comments that mines in the area adjacent to the Starless would soon be among the great mines of the Bingham district. But as in previous years, there were no reports of the Starless actually entering production, with any reported work being in the so-called development of the "huge" or "massive" ore body. No numbers were reported of the extent of tunnels being driven in the development work.

September 28, 1911
There was an agreement between the owners of the Montana-Bingham mine, which was driving a drainage and transportation tunnel, saying, "We have also an agreement from Colonel Wall on his Starless mine, adjoining the Montana-Bingham on the south, and lying between us and Utah Copper, by which he will pay us a transportation charge of 10 cents per ton." (Salt Lake Herald, September 28, 1911)

May 26, 1912
A report of the 1,000 feet of progress of the Montana-Bingham tunnel, which was to include access to the Starless mine. "The object of the company, which is composed mostly of local men, is not only to develop their own ground, but they will tap the workings of the Bingham Amalgamated, Fortuna, Starless and Keystone mines, which will use the new tunnel to transport their ore to the Copper Belt railway, for which service a royalty will be paid to the Bingham-Montana company. The tunnel company was organized last February by local men and work was started during that month, and already ore has been encountered which shows a good percentage of copper. After completion different mining companies will drift from various points in the tunnel, and will have splendid facilities for transporting their ore to the cars of the Copper Belt railway." (Salt Lake Herald, May 26, 1912)

(Research has found that the lowest Starless tunnel, known as the Main Tunnel, was at 6235 feet elevation. The Montana-Bingham tunnel was at 6028 feet elevation. The difference in elevation meant that the Starless company would have to drive an incline tunnel down 200 feet to reach the Montana-Bingham tunnel. Surface maps of the mining claims at Bingham indicate that the north line Starless group was approximately 1/4 mile south of the where the Montana-Bingham tunnel was being driven. Research has not yet found if a connection was actually completed.)

August 31, 1913
The Starless had driven its longest development tunnel for a distance of 2000 feet, with the last 500 feet being in the ore zone. There was a total of 6000 feet of development tunnels. Recently completed assays showed that there was little silver or gold ore, and that the copper ore was in the 1 to 2 percent range. "The Montana-Bingham tunnel will cut nearly 400 feet below the lowest level in the old Starless workings, and should prove of great importance to this group of 106 claims." (Salt Lake Herald, August 31, 1913)

December 15, 1913
Three Bingham mining companies announced that they intend to build a mill near the mouth of the Montana-Bingham tunnel in lower Bingham. The three companies were the Montana-Bingham Consolidated Mining company, the Bingham Congor Mining company, and the Starless Mining company. The Montana-Bingham company also announced plan to install an electric haulage system in their new tunnel. (Salt Lake Mining Review, December 15, 1913)

December 18, 1913
The portal of the Montana-Bingham tunnel was at the base of "McQuire Gulch" [better known as Ely Gulch] in lower Bingham, "almost opposite of Markham Gulch and directly across the canyon from the high school." The tunnel had reached a distance of 2400 feet from the portal, with a planned length of 4000 to 4500 feet. At its finished length the tunnel would "unwater and afford an avenue for the ores of the Starless, Bingham Amalgamated, Congor, Keystone Extension and Fortuna, all now idle." The portal of the Montana-Bingham tunnel was 350 feet lower than the lowest Starless tunnel. (Salt Lake Tribune, December 18, 1913)

September 13, 1915
Enos Wall announced that the Starless would soon return to production. The machinery in the mill was was being removed and replaced. Crushing rolls and concentrator tables were being installed, and the roof was being repaired. (Salt Lake Herald, September 13, 1915)

Throughout 1913 to 1916, and into 1917, almost every reference in newspapers of the Montana-Bingham tunnel included the Starless as one of the mines that would be drained and allowed transportation of its ore. In late 1916 and the first half of 1917, there were rumors (likely from Wall himself) that the Starless was to be included in a big merger of the mines that were being served by the Montana-Bingham tunnel.

September 1918
A report completed by an independent geologist in September 1918, in addition to the assays of the ore that had been sampled, described physical plant of the Starless as follows.

The property has been developed by a number of tunnels. They are known as the Main tunnel at an elevation of 6235 feet, the Bemis tunnel at 6296, the Middle Amanda at 6342, the Upper Amanda at 6513, and the Starless at 6228.

A south cross-cut has been driven from a point in the Main tunnel to the Utah Copper line and a raise driven along the line to the Bemis tunnel.

Above the Bemis tunnel a raise has been driven along the line to the Intermediate level at an elevation of 6353 feet.

Above the Intermediate level a raise connects with the Upstairs level at an elevation of 6487 feet

A vertical raise has been driven from a south, cross cut in the Middle Amanda tunnel and levels open at heights of 200 feet and 300 feet. These both extend nearly to the Utah Copper boundary.

There is no ore body of sufficient size and value to be mined profitably at the present time.

The property has been extensively developed without finding an important ore body. Along the Utah Copper boundary it averages 1.17 copper for 160 feet, while 150 feet away averages 0.98 percent copper for a width of 170 feet.

To make this grade of ore profitable a very large tonnage must be developed and I can see very little chance for this in the Starless property.

The Mascotte Tunnel attends under the Starless ground but did not cut any ore. It would be very easy to take the ore that may be developed to the Ohio mill for treatment through the tunnel. If an arrangement of this kind were made a such smaller ore body could be mined profitably than if it were necessary to build another mill.

September 13, 1919
Enos Wall asked the Third District court to issue a restraining order to prevent Utah Coper from building its Bingham & Garfield rail line across the surface ground of his Starless Group, which included the Klondike, Starless, Keystone, St. Patrick and Sarsfield mining claims. His reason that such railroad line would "interfere with the removal of ore deposits from his property." (Salt Lake Herald, September 13, 1919)

June 29, 1920
Enos A. Wall died in his home in Salt Lake City on June 29, 1920, at age 81. He had been treated for cancer in Baltimore in mid February 1920. He was an active Mason and was buried on July 2, 1920 in the Mount Olivet cemetery in Salt Lake City. (Salt Lake Herald, June 30, 1920; Associated Press nationwide; Salt Lake Herald, July 1, 1920)

1926
In 1926 Utah Copper acquired the 110-acre Starless Group from the Wall estate, which contained some disseminated copper ore. This brought Utah Copper land ownership in the West Mountain mining district to nearly 1,000 acres (Utah Copper Company 22nd Annual Report, 1926).

The only known, and dated photo of the Starless mine is dated January 13, 1923, indicating that it was documented for potential sale, following Wall's death in 1920. The photo shows what appears to be an abandoned site with the remnants of a mine opening, a coal-fired power house with one boiler. An earlier undated photo shows the mine opening and the power house in better days, and a short rail spur used to deliver coal for the boiler. Neither photo shows an ore bin or other indication of the Starless being an operating or producing mine.

Photo

(View a photo of the Starless mine, no date, but likely in the period between 1910 and 1920)

Enos A. Wall

"Colonel Enos Andrew Wall, pioneer mining man and long a leader in the industrial life of the west. Few men, if any, had more to do with the mineral development of the west than did Colonel Wall. Born at Richmond, Wayne County, Ind., June 21, 1838, he came west to Colorado in 1860 and at once became interested in mining. After three years in Colorado, Colonel Wall went to Montana, where he continued his search for gold, but varied his mining activities with those of freighter and trader. After years spent in Colorado, Idaho and Montana, in mining, in 1885 he returned to Utah and engaged in mining at Mercur and other camps of the state. In 1887 he went to Bingham and there made a discovery which in time led to the organization of the world-famous Utah Copper company." (Enos Andrew Wall obituary)

(Read more about Enos Wall)

Wall's Mill

In addition to the Starless mine, Enos Wall also leased and later owned two mills in Bingham. First was the Rogers mill, at its second location, which he purchased in 1901. He continued his ownership of the former Rogers mill from 1901 to 1904, at times leasing the mill to other companies to concentrate their own occasional shipments of low-grade lead-silver ores. He sold the Rogers mill in 1904, and purchased the larger Dewey mill.

After 1904, in addition to the Starless group of claims, Enos Wall also owned the 125-ton Dewey mill, that had been enlarged and remodeled in 1910. The mill in 1916 was equipped throughout with machinery of Col. Wall's own design, comprising Wall corrugated rolls, Wall steel rolls for middlings, three sets of jigs, two tables for concentrates, two Wilfley tables, and washers, of trough form, with valves and sprayers. Concentrates were discharged through the bottom and sands from the top. The mill had been in standby status since September 1915, with plans for operations to be resumed in 1916.

The Copper Curb and Outlook magazine of 1910 wrote, "Col. E. A. Wall, one of the richest mine owners of Bingham, after criticizing the Utah Copper company unmercifully for its alleged wasteful milling methods, has finished a plant that illustrates his own idea of efficiency."

###