336                                         LAWS OF MARYLAND                             [Ch. 2

MINERALS READY FOR MARKET WITHOUT ALLOWANCE FOR LABOR
AND EXPENSES.

REVISOR'S NOTE: This section is new language
derived from Art. 75, §41.

Subsection (a) contains the first provision
of §41.

Subsection (b) is revised to conform to

statutory interpretation in Mt. Savage

George's Creek Coal Company v. Monahan, 132

Md. 654 (1918); Strathmore Mining Co., v.
Bayard Coal and Coke Co., 139 Md. 355 (1921);

and Superior Construction Co. v. Elmo, 204

Md. 1 (1954). However, it appears that this
statute does not provide for the measure of
damages if the minerals were abstracted

negligently. The court stated in Mt. Savage

George's Creek Coal Co. v. Monahan, supra,

the first case to construe this statute, that
"The measure of damages fixed by the first
paragraph does not apply, if the party taking
the coal was negligent, because it is only
in the absence of fraud, negligence or
willful trespass that the rule applies. If
'negligence' as used in the first paragraph,
is not embraced in one of the terms
'furtively or in bad faith¹, as used in the
second paragraph (and it would scarcely be
contended that it is), then there is no part
of the statute applicable to a case where
there was negligence, and if it is included,
then the appellant can not complain of the
measure of damages allowed, as it even got
the benefit of the deduction for the cost of
removing the coal to the mouth of the mines".

However, in Strathmore Coal Mining Co. v.

Bayard__Coal and__Coke Co., supra, the court

was quite explicit in stating that "fixing
the measure of damages for the wrongful
working and abstracting of another's
minerals, does not apply, by its terms, when
such wrongful working and abstraction are the
result of negligence, the measure of damages
in such case is that which existed prior to
the passage of the statute, - that is, the
value of the coal when first severed and
before it was placed upon the mine cars,
without deducting the expense of its
severance". The court made an apparent