The weekly Arizonian., 1859-03-10
\ WEEKLY PAPER.
Mining LAWS.

Mining LAWS
 We extract the following paragraph from letter written by Ex-Governor Denver, of Kan sas to Hon. Alex. II. Stephens, House of Reps, in reply to a note asking for information in re- lation to the new Territory to be organized out of the western parts of Kansas and Nebraska. His remarks are to the point and are equal applicable to the vast mineral regions embra- ced in the Gadsden Purchase.
 "lhe mineral resources have been but very partially developed, but there is nO doubt ofthe existence of gold in considerable quantities over a large extent of country. As far as my knowledge extends, the discoveries ofgod have thus far been confined to the eastern slope of the mountains; the principal workings of the mines have been on the head waters of the South Platte It has been found also, as l am informed on the North Platte, and on the Ar kansas, above Bents Fort There can be but little doubt, however from the geological struc- ture of the country, that the western slope will be found richer than the eastern, and that such wall be found the character of the mineral de- posits soutward for some distance into New Mexico, where the silver and copper take the place Of the gold
 In ths connection it may be well to direct ,ui attclton to the importance Of providing 1llcS and regulations for the government of the .al t t.is tiIlic thers j. scatcey any na- ton OF the globe with mines of ;he precious ,uat;..s so extensive as ours, and vel, strange to say, Congress has passed no laws in rcIa- ton to thcm, nor has fl yet been decided whether Congress has a right to sc! or other wise to dispose of the mines. The laws of Hpain ana Mexico rccOg gnZe the mines of pre- cops metals as part of the eminent domain which belongs to the sovereignty, and cannot be alienated The common law of England agrees with this rule in every particular Tn ,he celebrated case of Pollards Lessee cS la gan etdL, (3d Howard supreme Court Reports, ) the Supreme Court decided that Congress could not interfere with the eminent domain, even in a Territory, bat could hold it in trust only for the future State If tlis be so with the TerritO- res, the argument would seem to apply with much greater force to the States of the Union. The sovereignty of the State governments, with in their respective States Is undoubted, and the right of eminent domain can belong only to the Sovereign power In several of the States and in all of the Territories, the Federal Gov crnmcnt is great nd-owner-nothing more Her lands are exempt from taxation by agree mcnt with the States, but in nothing else does she occupy a different position with regard tt the rights of ownership, or with regard to the rights of eminent domain from that of any other landed proprietor. She may exercise rights of ownership over her property but car not interfere with the eminent donuin--wtl the sovereignty.
 Thus far Congress has in no instance acted in contrarcnton of this principle, nor have many of the States asserted their right to the mines of precious metals found within the borders, though some of them have done so, a for instance New York and Pennsylvania The settlement of these questions is of th' greatest importance to the mining interests O the country and no correct settlement is likel, to be had unless they are thoroughly under stood
 However this question may be decided witl regard to the States, there can be no doubt bu Congress may, even as trustee for the lutur State, adopt such rules and regulations for tn management of the mines in the Territories a may be deemed necessary and the sooner thi is done the better One thing and only on seems to have been determined on, and that is that the mines shall be left for all to work with