Mariposa Democrat., 1857-12-31
From The Washington Intelligencer
CALIFORNIA GOLD MINES.


In the Inteigsncer of the 3lst of July last the fol-
lowing paragraph was copied from an exchange paper
as an ordinary item of news;
"FREMoNT's GOLD CLAIMs.-A very important
principle has been decided by the Supreme Court of
California in the Of the Merced Mining Company
.agt. John C. Fremont case, which, from the magni
fude of the interests involved has attracted great at
tention. The court holds that the minerals in the
land belong to the owner of the land and not to the
United States as has been claimed by some and that
the extracting them by other parties would be work
ing him an rreparabe injury. Consequently an in
junction will hold. The decision was rendered by q
majority of the court the Chief Justice dissenting"
Learning that this version of the case was erroneous
have referred to the decision of the Court ITSELF
and gather from the elaborate opinion of Judge BUR-
NETT, concurred in by Judge TERRY, the following
facts:
That the Merced Mining Company Organized under
the general law of ncorporation) have been working
certain veins Of goldbearing quartz, for the purpose
of extracting the gold from the rock, and have
pended large sums of money thereon ; that defend
ants (Co Fremont and others) claim an interest ad-
verse to the plaintiffs, but that they have title I;
that the title to the minerals in the soil of California
Is in the State, and does not attach to the owner Of
the soil that defendants are trespassers, and avow
their intention TO take possession of their entire prop
erty. An injunction claimed and granted by the
court below, and this application the part of the
Mining Company was made to the Supreme Court to
have the injunction made perpetual This was grant
ed by two Of the Judges of the Supreme Court beng
majority,) Chief Justice MURRAY dissenting.
The effect of the decision appears to be that the
minerals in the land belonging to the State of Caior
nia her title being derived from that previously held
by the Government of Mexico, the latter having ac
quired by the Revolution all the rights held by the
Crown of Spain that, therefore, the Merced Mining
Company have the right to work the mines under
their charter, the proprietor Of the soil only being en-
titled to the annual rent which it would bring for
agricultural purposes.
The opposite of the conclusion stated in the para
graph quoted seems to be the one arrived at by the
Court viz that the minerals belong to the State, and
not to the owner of the soil.
Whilst on this subject, which would at first seem to
be complicated one few extracts from the speech
of the Hon. j. W. DENVER, of California, delivered in
the House of Representatives the 30th July 1856
may suffice to throw light as to the title to min
erals on the public lands
"The treaty of peace between the Crown of Spain
and the Mexican Republic signed on the 2sth
day of November, 1886. The first article recognised
the independence and sovereignty Of Mexico. The
seventh article recognised the dominion of the Crown
of Spain to have endured until the year 1921 There
are no DEGREES of the Supreme Government of Mex
cn from the year 1921 to the year 1854 which affect
or change, in any way the preexsting rights of the
sovereign to absolute title to and control Of all mines
and minerals. They passed to the Supreme Govern
ment of Mexico, and remained unaltered, as perfect
and unimpaired as they existed in the Spanish Crown
prior to the treaty of 1886. They rights capable
of being transferred and passed to the United States
by the treaty of ls4s, (Guadaupe Hdalgo)
"The regulations of the Crown Of Spain embraced
all minerals of whatever character. They also
sttuted the mining laws Of the Supreme Government
OF Mexico 1t was not necessary by the laws of the
Crown Of Spain and the Supreme Government of
Mexico, in order to project those particular rights OF
the sovereign power to make any of the min
erals which might exit within grant made to in
dvidual. Those grants were always made for towns
agricultural and grazing mining purpoes This
was the known and established policy of the country
The lands of Mexico were always treated by the SOW
ereign power with view to a two-fod relation and
interest The one was agricultural and grazing, the
other mining. The latter was peculiarly considered
as to revenue, and no feesimple to il made
to an individual. The subject citizen who obtained
the land took that and that only, subject to all these
rights-the limitations and conditions of the mining
regulations. All the lands which might prove to
tain minerals liable to be denounced and taken
up by a stranger If he were first to discover them-
The same general principle applied to mines which
had baan cd AM he
or owner of the lands where minerals were found
entitled to an appraised value to be fixed to them
agricultural or grazing lands, and no more and no
less. The great object TO encourage mining. The
policy was developed in the reign of Phillip H. when
the power and mining of Spain at their
height. That policy has never been changed and no
minerals have ever been passed in feesmple to indi
viduas by grants of land unless by express declara
tions to that effect of which found in grants
for lands in California. They there remained in the
sovereign They passed in the eession of the Terrific
ry of California to the Supreme Government of the
United States, and vest in no individual to whom
grants were made by the Crown of Spain or by the
Supreme Government of Mexico, without being first
divested out of the United States in the specific form
of release made and intended to operate as title con-
ferred for minerals.
"The grantees then in California, took no title to
minerals, and hold none except such was held by
them in common with every other citizen The con-
firmaton by the commissioners and courts of the
United States conferred title. They could add
nothing. Their judgment was as to the regularity
and legality of the grants solely, and would go to the
extent, simply aud no further, of the laws of the
Crown of Spain and of the Supreme Government of
Mexico. There is nothing in the act of Congress by
which that commission was created which either does
or was intended to change the laws of Mexico this
subject The rule is, that they shall take by the laws
Of the Crown of Spain, or of the Supreme Govern
ment of Mexico and by their authority they hold, and
by none other They receive from them great bene
fits If they do not under the treaty, form the sole
authority under which they hold, then the United
States would have a right to reduce these immense
principates of land which have been granted to
them down TO a size suited to institutions and
policy. But IL they protected by the laws of the
Crown OF Spain and Of the Supreme Government Of
..t..4 Al. Ill 81