After a full consideration of all of the testimony presented in the case, I am of the opinion that the tracts in question are mineral in character, and therefore affirm your decision, and return the papers transmitted with your letter of the seventh ultimo. Very respectfully, C. SCHURZ, Secretary. The Commissioner of the General Land Office. No. 10. After party's agricultural entry has been formally canceled upon final decision that land is mineral in character, his proper course is to make a new claim and initiate a new contest. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, WASHINGTON, D. C., March 24, 1876. SIR: I have considered the application of J. C. Clough et al. for a rehearing in the case of Robert Anderson, applicant for patent for lots 1 and 2 in N. E. of section 2, T. 15 N., R. 9 E., M. D. M., Sacramento District, California, received by you from Hon. A. A. Sargent, and forwarded to me with your letter of tenth instant. Anderson made pre-emption cash entry of the land September 12, 1870. Charges of fraud in the entry being made and properly supported by affidavits, you, June 19, 1871, suspended the entry and ordered an investigation. February 7, 1872, you considered the case at length on its merits, and ordered the cancellation of the entry, deciding the land to be mineral. From this decision no appeal was taken; it became final, and Anderson's entry was formally canceled July 9, 1872. New claim and contest. On October 21, 1873, an application, accompanied by several affidavits, was made for a rehearing, which was considered and denied by your office in letter of March 8, 1874, and your action was, on appeal to the Department, affirmed November 20, 1875. An examination of the case fails to satisfy me that the action heretofore taken therein should be reversed, and I am therefore of the opinion that the rehearing should not be granted. If, however, Mr. Anderson thinks he can bring himself within the provisions of the law, and that the mineral in the land has been exhausted, or that later developments have demonstrated its non-mineral character, I see no objection to his making a new claim, and initiating a new contest, after proper notice, before the local officers. The papers in the case transmitted with your letters of March 10th and 18th, inst., are herewith returned. Very respectfully, Z. CHANDLER, Secretary. To the Commissioner of the General Land Office. No. 11. Agricultural land, essential to the successful working of a mining claim, and therefore more valuable for mineral than agricultural purposes, subject to sale under the mining acts. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, GENERAL LAND OFFICE, WASHINGTON, D. C., December 20, 1876. Register and Receiver, Fair Play, Col. GENTLEMEN: I have carefully considered the testimony and sworn statements submitted in regard to the character of the land embraced by cash entry No. 30, made by John W. Smith and Frederick A. Clark, viz.: Dumping ground. * * From the testimony, these tracts appear to be in the possession of Smith and Clark, and to be only valuable for dumping grounds for their mining claim which lies to the north of said premises. The testimony in this case shows that said tracts are essential to the successful working of said mining claims, and that they are of greater value for mining than for agricultural purposes. On the thirtieth November, 1872, Smith and Clark made cash entry No. 30 of said tracts. It will be observed that four twenty-acre tracts are embraced by said entry. Cash entries can embrace legal subdivisions only, except in case of fractional subdivisions, or where a part of a fortyacre tract is embraced within a mining claim. Said entry will therefore be held for cancellation, and the said tracts will be subject to disposal under the mining acts. * * * Very respectfully, J. A. WILLIAMSON, Commissioner. No. 12. Lands not mineral in character, but valuable only for the development of mining claims, should be reserved from disposal under the agricultural land laws. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, GENERAL LAND OFFICE, WASHINGTON, D. C., January 3, 1876. Register and Receiver, Marysville, California. GENTLEMEN: I have carefully examined the papers and testimony transmitted with your letter of the twenty-fifth September, 1873, in regard to the character of the N. W. 4 of N. W. of Sec. 26, T. 16 N., R. 6 E., Mt. Do. Mer. The facts in the case are as follows: The official township plat of T. 16 N., R. 6 E., Mt. Do. Mer., was filed fourteenth November, 1867. On the seventh April, 1868, Henry W. R. Crouch filed D. S. No. 4776 upon the N. half of N. W. quarter of sec. 26, T. 16 N., R. 6 E., Mt. Do. Mer., alleging settlement in 1864. On the eighteenth April, 1868, mineral affidavit No. 238 was filed in your office, alleging the W. half of W. half of said section 26 to be mineral in character. On the seventeenth October, 1870, Crouch filed an abandonment to said N. E. quarter of N. W. quarter. The first November, 1871, was fixed upon for a hearing before you, when the matter was postponed to the eighteenth December, 1871, at which time testimony was offered in regard to the N. W. quarter of N. W. quarter of said section 26, the same being the only tract in dispute. The testimony submitted at the hearing establishes the fact that the land is of little value for agricultural purposes, and that it is bounded on the south by valuable gold-bearing gravel mires or deep hydraulic diggings, which can be successfully worked and developed only by means of tunnels passing through this land to Deer Creek, which is the only natural and practicable outlet for these mines. It is shown that portions of the land in dispute are claimed and held by mine owners, and that several tunnels are now being run through this land for the purpose of developing and working said gravel mines. It also appears that Mr. Crouch has conveyed by deed to the Mooney Flat Hydraulic Mining Company certain mining rights upon the land in dispute, and that he acknowledges the mineral character of the S. half of S. half of N. W. quarter of the N. W. quarter of said section. Agricultural land valuable for the development of mines. The testimony in this case forces upon my mind the conclusion that this land is only valuable on account of its location with reference to said mining claims, and that it is of far greater value for mining purposes than for agricultural purposes. Mines only become valuable when they can be developed and the precious metals extracted; and in cases of this kind, where the land is of little, if any, value for agricultural purposes, and is essential to the proper working of deep gravel mines, it should be withheld from sale under the laws regulating the disposal of agricultural lands, and disposed of only to such parties as may be entitled to the same under the mining acts of Congress. In the case under consideration, the land will be withheld from sale as agricultural land. You will acknowledge the receipt hereof, and inform all parties in interest, allowing sixty days within which an appeal may be taken to the Hon. Secretary of the Interior. Very respectfully, S. S. BURDETT, Commissioner. No. 1. No. 2. No. 3. No. 4. No. 5. No. 6. No. 7. No. 8. No. 9. CHAPTER XIII. MISCELLANEOUS. MILL SITES. Must embrace only non-mineral land. Should be recorded and located. Mill site adjoining end line of lode not allowed. Mill site and lode included in same application for patent. Expen- EASEMENTS, EXCEPTIONS, ETC. Right of ingress and egress across mining locations. Clause inserted in mining patents protecting rights of easement and Clause inserted in patent protecting water rights. Clause inserted in patent where portion of lode and surface had Excepting clause inserted in patents to railroad companies. No. 10. No. 11. No. 12. No. 13. Sutro Tunnel. No. 24. Citizenship-Manner of establishing proof. No. 25. Woman qualified. No. 26. No. 27. No. 28. No. 29. No. 30. No. 31. No. 32. Executor. Proof of citizenship under Act of January 22, 1880. HEARINGS. a. Notice of hearing to be prepared and signed by local officers. b. Question and answer. When Central Pacific R. R. Co. seek to select land. Mineral lands sought to be entered as agricultural. Disinterested persons invited to testify in favor of surveyor's returns. |