The Placer herald., 1874-01-31
MINERAL LANDS.

lDere seems TO be squabble among our
legislators over Mining Land Bill recently
introduced in Congress by Senator Sargent.
We confess to know but little of the real
character Of the bill, as we have not yet seen
it; but like many Of our cotemporaries we
are compelled to regard anything rotton that
comes from Denmark, until we know posi-
lively to the contrary. Still, it is not i'm
possible that good might arise hom such a
source. One thing we do know, that the
law as it now exists in reference to securing
a title to lands in the mineral belt, is curse
to the country; as every man who has had
experience in the matter will heartily attest.
The long routine through gouging Land Of
flee officials, which parties are now required
to pass through, consumes. including travel
ing expenses to and from Sacramento, a little
fortune; and there is nothing more certain
than that the law in this matter should be
amended. Whether Sargent's new bill COW
ers the objections to the present law we can
not say until we see it, but the following
from the Grass Valley Union, which is very
good authority on mining matters, would in
dicate that it was an Improvement. At all
events, we give the U',ion's comments on
the subject, and will give our own more ex-
tendedly as soon as we have a chance to pc
ruse the bill thoroughly and study its effects
The Sacramento Union was taken, few
years or 80 ago, with violent hatred to
Senator Sargent. The disease has been
growing on that paper ever since the first at
tack, and the paper is now so badly off that
it goes against everything Senator Sargent
says or does. The question with the Sacra-
mento Union is not whether a proposed
measure is right Or wrong, but "did Sargent
originate it or does he favor it?" When it
ascertains that Sargent is in favor of the
measure, the Sacramento Union opposes
that measure. On this principle it is now
doing its best to defeat the Mineral Land
Bill (No. 23) introduced into the United
States Senate by Mr.. Sargent. If the bill
should be defeated the interests of both far
mers and miners in the mining section will
greatly suffer. A. semblyman Burt, of
Placer County, is in the same condition that
the Sacramento Union is in. He can see
nothing Of merit in anything Senator Sar-
gent does or favors. Therefore he opposes
a bill which will benefit his constituents, just
because Sargent wants to benefit those con-
sttuents.
And the Sacramento Union quotes Burt
for authority on the evil in the bill, and
Burt rehashes to the Assembly the utter
ance of the Sacramento Union. The two
are thus arguing in circle; they are mutu-
ally depending on each other and have no
argument in truth to support them.
Let us examine one Of the points made by
the Sacramento Union when it quotes its
follow hater, Hon. Mr. Burt, Of Placer
County. That paper says that Burt says:
"He thinks the laws now in force are sat-
isfactory to both classes, Farmers and min
ers) and that if ian opinion could be had at
this time from practical miners throughout
the State, they would be almost unit in
its favor That is in favor Of the old law,
and against the radical change proposed by
Sargent's bill, No. %. The only class to
be benefited by this bill, he says, are those
who want to monopol:ze the mineral lands
for the purpose of speculation; and he does
not scruple to place Sargent himself along
with this class. These spectators are in
vited by bill No. % to come in and occupy
the unprospected mining lands as specula-
tors"
Now the farmers and the miners of this
part of the country know that the law as it
now is (that is the law called the "old law },
has been, and is now, forcing them into ru-
nous contests in the land offices and in the
Courts of the State. Sargent's proposed
bill which makes bona Jfde mining test of
the mineral character Of ground will stop
those expense suits. Burt ought to know
that.
But Burt declares in his speech, from
which the Sacramento N,,ion gets the above
quoted extract, that Sargent hifRself is
monopolzer of mining ground, and that he
! has several hundred acres of such ground in
this county Well, suppose that to be the
truth. If he has monepolized mining
ground he has done 80 under an old law,
and not under the provisions of bill which
has not yet become law. Nay, the plain
truth is that Sargent & Jacobs got their
mining claims under the laws passed by
miners themselves, in their local district
meetings. They have kept their ground
through thick and thin, and it kept them
poor (down to the bed rock, as the miners
phrase it), for many years. They may re-
alize on their claims, and If they do, they
will deserve all they get. So much for the
Senator's monopolizing, under old laws.
But the old law does not prevent the ac-
QUESTION, by men who have money, Of
large bodies of mineral land. The North
Bloomfield Company has acquired an i'm
mense tract of mining ground by purchase,
and that too while what is called the old low
still axists. IL the old law continues to ex-