The Nevada journal., 1852-11-26
Disposition OF the Mineral
Lands.

Ihis Is question that sheuld sngross
the attention of the people Of the min
ing districts of this state. 1t appeals
very closely to the interests of the min
mining counties, the whole state, and
the United States. 1t is yet an open
question, and it should be discussed by
miners and by people generally, until
they are satisfied what the best policy
is to be pursued in the premises.
Being California miner, should
like to express my views on the subject
that the public may know the views of
ut least one miner on the question.
am well aware that before taking charge
of the Journal you we're for a long while
''only a common red shirted miner" and
that the opinion you hold that all legis-
lation in reference to the mines should
spring from miners is shared by many
Others, yet believe the other side Of
the question has never been fairly pre-
sentcd, and claim your indulgence for a
little space.
concur entirely with the suggestion
made months aso that the mineral lands
should be donated, firstly, because that
will settle the question, and let us at
once know what to rely on. We need
stability. If it is objected that diff
Guilty exists in determining the amount
of land to be donated, also in discrimin-
ating between the rich and poor lands
reply that difficulty is not greater than
where man is allowed to locate one or
two claims, and buy and hold them, and
as many Others as he plcases. Why
not give him legal right at once by
donation Will he have more power to
hold from others the mineral lands
1t is false idea that man shall not
get as rich by mining as by other busi
ness--that he shall not monopolize too
much wealth, and prevent some other
man from enjoying part Of it, though
that man may not be in California, or
even bern. Secondly, to donate will
give poor man the same chance with
the rich to get claims and good ones
1t may be said that this donation will
give man a chance to monopolize too
much land rich in gold-it can give no
advantage than man now has in pur-
chasing. He has that right by priority
in water and land, and no matter how
much money he may make by it, he
holds it as long as he pleases and sells
his right when he is tired of it.
A principal objection urged is that it
will bring large part of the people as
hircIings under the power of the eapi-
talists Not more SO than where men
have the power to purchase claims, and
the best of the ground. Again, people
who work by the day, as a general thing
make the most money with less risk
Even if man had thirty acres of min
cral land, when he had built his house,
and got his family here settled for life,
and got his machinery on the ground
and paid for, he would not have very
large amount left to live on the rest of
his days, while land wern out at mining
is of little account fer cultivation. Fur
thermore, some bonus should accrue to
man whose health and life is perilled |
by years of labor in the water at min
ing when his labor is handspring to
keep in motion the entire business of
the state.
All the COED results which flow from
an ownership of the soil would follew if
this system is adopted, namely, it will
induce men to feel at home, to go to
work and cultivate the soil. and to put
up machinery, to cut stone, to make