Helena weekly herald. [volume] (Helena, Mont.) 1867-1900, 1880-12-09
REPRESENTATIO OF MINING
CLAIMS.

IN answer 10 Il cOuu lIOlu kocllit
tor Hill, of Colorado, the Hon. Commissioner
Of the General Land Office has recently writ
ten a letter giving his Interpretation of the
amendment of the mining law of the United
States, approved January 22d, 1880. This
opinion has been telegraphed by the Asso
ciated Press and generally published through
out the United States as an important
mining decision" It has been accepted and
commented upon as such by many of the
mining journals, and will undoubtedly be
acted upon as the laac by many persons who
are ignorant of the province ofthe Hon. Com
missioner of the General Land Office.
The question raised by said so called de-
clsion did not arise upon any case which had
been officially brought before the Depart
ment for adjudication it was not a case
which could be carried by appeal before the
Hon. Secretary of the Interior, it was purely
hypothetical; hence I fail to see by what
method the letter can be magnifed into q
decision, although | am free to admit the i'm
portance of the question, and | have no
doubt that it will cause much needless liti-
cation and perhaps more serious trouble.
While freely admitting the undoubted
right of the Hon. Commissioner to hold an
opinion of his own in the matter, | believe it
was impolitic for him to allow such an opinion
to be published throughout the United
States as a decision of the Department, for
the reason that it can in no way accomplish
any good and can in no way influence or af-
feet the decision of the Courts in determin-
ing the law on the subject
was some what surprised at the first so
called ruling of the Hon. Commissioner, in
which he took certain grounds, which he
now says he inadvertently gave countenance
to. But l was astonished by the last for
the reason that / do not know what bearing,
if any, the opinion of the Hon. Commissioner
can have in determining the rights of par
ties in any case which can arise under the
law.
BY decision OF the Hon. Commissioner in
the case of the j. H. Russell lode Copps
Land Owner, vol. V, page Is, he holds, and
very properly, as follows: " Whether said
claim was legally located and has been held
in conformity with law since the day of loca-
ton, are questions which would properly come
before the Courts for determination < < = "
In the same ease, which was carried to the
Supreme Court of Montana, Gonu vs.. Russell,
{ now in hands Of the reporter or publisher),
it was held substantially as follows: " That
under the Mining Laws of the United States,
the possessory right to mining claim which
has been properly located, remains in the
original locator and his grantees, until some
subsequent locator takes lawful possession of
the claim by relocation, such relocation
of marking the new claim on the
ground by monuments; and although the
first locator Of the mine has abandoned it for
years, if he resume work prior to such mark
ing on the ground with monuments by the
second locator, the first locators right to the
claim holds good"
In case of protest, when the protestant
alleges non compliance with law, the Hon.
Commissioner may possibly have the author
ity to order hearing to determine the facts;
and if upon such hearing it be satisfactorily
shown that the applicant has failed to make
the necessary expenditures, the protest may
then be admitted as an adverse claim, in
which event the adverse claimant will be re-
4uired to commence suit within the thirty
days prescribed by law, when the case would
be transferred to the Courts for decision
| cannot readily conceive how the question
raised can ever come before the Department
for decision, except in similar manner as
above stated; but if it should occur, then a
decision by the Hon. Commissioner, rendered
in accordance with his opinion expressed in
the letter, would undoubtedly be set aside
by the Hon., Secretary of the Interior on ap-
peal, if properly presented.
In my opinion the question Of forfeiture
cannot arise except in cases where there is
an adverse possession, upon the merits of
which the Courts have exclusive jurisdiction,
and the opinions Of Tom, Dick or Harry are
entitled to fully as much legal weight as this
so-called Important Mining Decision
The act of January 90, 1880, provides:
''That the period within which the work re-
quired to be done annually on all impatient
ed mineral claims, shall commence on the
first day of January succeeding the date of
location of such claim, and this section shall
apply to all claims located since the 10th
day of May, A.. d. 1872"
To casual observer it seems plain enough