San Andreas independent., 1857-10-31
written for the San Andreas Independent
The Ranch Act.

DrdHcu lO aSSeTt her TlSHtS ana opinions
as well as her sister, who, in communi-
cation over the signature of E." dated
North Branch, October 18th, after a
suitable apology by way of introduction,
expresses himself, that he regrets seeing
efforts made to prejudice the miners
against the OBSERVATION-DISCLOSURES very ap-
propriately and frankly acknowledged that
the legitimate business of the mining
country was mining. So far | agree with
+" E." with one exception, which is, the
assertion that there has been any effort
made to create a prejudice against the
agriculturalists; but merely an effort made
to have the miners look after their rights,
which have been unjustly wrested from
them by our sapient and oficious legisla-
ture, which some have and more can take
advantage of, by appropriating to their
special benefit, large portions of mining
ground for other uses than mining,
which, as stated by /" e ;, y are the legiti-
mate uses; to which | will add, the ex-
elusive purposes which the United States,
who is yet the sole owner and proprie-
tor-intended should be made of the
country alluded to. Then, instead of
the miners or any one else espousing
their cause being blamable in exciting
prejudice, it can be fairly demonstrated
that the Legislature, and those wishing
to take advantage of the Act referred to-
have created the prejudice, and no miner
would be countenanced or encouraged in
so wanton an actof vandalism as to destroy
or modest any kind of cultivation or I'M
provement on land containing no deposits
of gold. 1t is the monopolizing and oc-
cupying of auriferous land for agricultu-
raj and horticultural, and, in fact, for any
other purpose than mining, which is COM
planned of. As for any prejudices which
may be engendered, the miners Justly
hold the legislature and its proteges re-
sponsible for. 1t would be very natu-
raj inference, and in fact force one ire
sistibly to the conclusion that the Act of
the legislature for the Protection of
Ranchers' in the admitting for
sake of argument, equal rights-would
go-to show they considered the mining
portion of the community as unruly, ag-
gressive and unjust; that the civil, law
abiding portion of our citizens, who wished
to engage in the various branches of cul-
tivation, including the pleasant culture of
fruit or shade trees, or the refining infu-
cnces of rearing the floral beauties which
ornament the well ordered household, =
needed the protection of the strong arm
of our civil law, against the rough miner
But how stands the account, and what is
the conclusion of the whole matter, or
the deductions which can be adduced
from correct premises in the case? The
Legislature can only exercise jurisdiction
over personal property or improvements
in the mines, that do not conflict with
the free and unrestrained privileges of
the miners in working any portion of the
mining ground, agreeably to the laws
passed by themselves, in their respective
mining districts, which have been re-or-
ganized by the Courts, in deciding dis
putes between mining companies, in ac-
cordance to their own laws, which is right
and democratic in spirit and practice
and | venture to most unequivocally as
sert, that their jurisdiction extends no
further.
In every mining district, the size of
every description of claim is particularly
described, and their boundaries defined,
which they are obliged to respect. But
in the case under consideration, the Leg
islature have usurped all power in the
mines, and by co'tpd de main, has thrown
aside not only the rights, but power of
the miners to regulate OF pass laws to
govern the mines, thus not only stultify-
ing their former Acts, in acknowledging
the jurisdiction of the miners aud respect
ing their laws, but in arraying one por-
ton of the inhabitants in hostility against
the other, by allowing any unprincipled
person to take up 100 acres of land, os-
tensibly to occupy for agricultural pur-
poses, but in reality, to hold, in some in
stances, possibly one hundred times the
amount of mining ground which the laws
passed by the miners would guarantee
to him, and by complying with the State
law in enclosing the land, and perhaps
plant out few scattering fruit trees, or
sowing grain and vegetables can hold it,
to either mine at his leizure, or sell out
to miners. These are the abuses which
have and can be made of the Ranch
Act" as well as diverting the water from
the natural channels, for irrigation, to the
detriment of miners. And what is the
process of assessing damages before the
miner can enter the sacred precinct of
those ranches? He is obliged to submit
to the preliminary steps of having three
disinterested owners of ranches assess the
probable damages which they, in their
impartial opinion may think right between
the innocent ranchers and evil-disposed
miner, and even get a ranch owner to go
his security.
AS a transient miner cannot be con-
sidered responsible, he must deposit the
amount assessed with those disinterested
officers and ranchers. Admirable impair
tiality! Justice and protection, with a
veneeance
Our legislature, In thus transcending