## Facts

- John P. Bailey was the common grantor in competing mineral title claims to a 375-acre tract in Wyoming County, West Virginia.
- In 1881, Bailey executed an instrument to W. A. French for 99 years, using lease language (“demise and lease”) and granting coal and mineral rights under the tract.
- Consideration consisted of $1 plus a royalty of three cents per ton of coal and other minerals mined and shipped; the instrument imposed no express duty to commence mining by a certain date and required no minimum rentals independent of production.
- In 1885, Bailey conveyed the land (including minerals) to Grigsby and Gooch; Chandler later derived his mineral claim through this chain.
- French’s instrument predated and was recorded before the 1885 deed, but no mining operations were conducted for decades under the French instrument.
- Chandler filed an equity action to remove the French instrument and its assignments as a cloud on his mineral title, asserting forfeiture or abandonment due to nondevelopment.

## Issues

1. Whether the 1881 instrument vested the lessee with a term title to minerals in place for 99 years or was merely a mining lease.
2. If the instrument was a mining lease, whether prolonged failure to commence mining within a reasonable time constituted forfeiture or abandonment permitting equitable cancellation.
3. Whether the tract’s remoteness from railroad facilities at the time of execution excused nondevelopment in determining “reasonable time.”

## Decision

- The court held the 1881 instrument was a mining lease and did not vest title to minerals in place for the 99-year term.
- The court recognized an implied covenant requiring the lessee to begin mining within a reasonable time where the lessor’s compensation depends on production royalties and there is no minimum rental or express contrary agreement.
- The lessee’s long nondevelopment supported a presumption of abandonment, justifying cancellation in equity to remove a cloud on title.
- The court rejected the argument that the property’s remoteness from railroad access indefinitely excused nondevelopment absent contracting tied to a specific contemplated railroad project.
- The decree cancelling the lease as a cloud on Chandler’s title was affirmed.

## Legal Principles

- A long-term mineral instrument framed as a lease and supported primarily by production royalties, with no minimum rental and no express commencement covenant, is treated as a mining lease rather than a conveyance of minerals in place.
- In such a mining lease, the law implies a covenant to begin mining operations within a reasonable time.
- Unreasonable delay in commencing operations creates a presumption of abandonment, and a court of equity may cancel the lease to clear title.
- General impracticability of shipment due to remoteness from rail transportation at the time of contracting does not, by itself, alter the reasonable-time analysis when the agreement was not made in reliance on a specific contemplated railroad improvement.

## Conclusion

The court characterized the 1881 French instrument as a mining lease with an implied duty of timely development and affirmed equitable cancellation after decades of nonuse, holding that nondevelopment presumptively abandoned the leasehold and left an actionable cloud on the lessor-derived mineral title.


Chandler v. French, 73 W. Va. 658, 81 S.E. 825 (W. Va. 1914)